We are reckless jargon users in education. Just ask anyone coming out of your local supermarket what they think “effective pedagogies” or “student agency” means.
Jargon is used to: exclude; disguise; imply expertise; and to market product. No one benefits when words are used to divide and confuse.
Nine notable offenders have agreed to have a go at stripping the jargon from the following educational terms (see below). They will seek the simple message within and then express it in a 1000 word blog post.
My contribution is the cover art and the introduction – MAPPING LEARNING. I used pencil and paper. The irony of the endeavour is not lost on me – take a popular educational expression (captured in 2 words and a hyphen) and simplify it by writing 1000 words about it – These 1000 words when published online may well provoke an outpouring of even more words.
Pam Hook @arti_choke
People and their 1000 Words Cover Design & Introduction Pam Hook The Picture Dr Wendy Kofoed - 21st Century Learning 1000 Words Annemarie Hyde - Modern Learning Environments 1000 Words Monika Kern - Cyber/Digital Citizenship 1000 Words Richard Wells - Digital Learning Tools 1000 Words Philippa Nicoll Antipas - Future Focused Pedagogy 1000 Words Craig Kemp - Digital Collaboration 1000 Words Sonya Van Schaijik - Connected Educators/Learners 1000 Words Karen Melhuish Spencer - Digital Communities 1000 Words Conclusion Tahu Paki - Whanaungatanga 1000 Words
Note to self: There is no suggestion of any interpretive dance with chickens at dawn, photographs of tummy button lint, or music created from fish scales, from this lot of “connected educators” – the medium - it seems - is the message). This post is part of a #edbookNZ project organised by Sonya Van Schaijik and being co-authored by a great set of New Zealand based educators for Connected Educator Month. The #CENZ14 event will be held on Friday 31st October 8.00pm-9.00pm (UT + 13 hrs) Click here for details
Pam Hook @arti_choke
E-ducators, it’s about a learner mind-set By Dr Wendy Kofoed Educators are adept at seizing new words and using these like they are the Holy Grail of education, that is until the next new batch of words come to takes their place. While perhaps some new words are fit for purpose, others have a more limited shelf-life, and some have underlying purposes that should be questioned. Perhaps a challenge for we educators is to be a little more critical of the ‘education-speak’ we use. In particular, to ensure that as educators our agency is not diminished by the use of these words. E-learning and e-learners, for example, are two words that we hear about regularly in education discussions. It may be timely as educators to question the meaning of these words, why they might be used instead of the words learning and learners, and discuss any implications of their continued use. The word e-learning has a variety of meanings, from learning supported by information and communication technology (ICT), learning supported by particular electronic tools, blended or on-line learning, learning models or frameworks that define a process of work, or even enhanced learning. By implication an e-learner is one who learns using any of the above forms of e-learning. Given these diverse meanings of elearning/elearner is there any wonder that some teachers in schools/classrooms/spaces/modern learning environments/hearths/pods/hubs/areas… may be sitting (on a chair not a bean bag) waiting for clarification of their next steps as e-ducators? I would argue that the addition of the ‘e’ to e-learning/e-learners is now unhelpful as it perpetuates a notion that there is an important difference between these words and the words learning/learners. We learn with or without the ‘e’, and to survive in and contribute to New Zealand society today without the ‘e’ would be a challenge.
Dr Wendy Kofoed @newmarketschool
So why was the ‘e’ added in the first place? Possibly to emphasise that a change had occurred in our ways of working, but as we know there is nothing new about change – rock, slate, blackboard, paper, screens, touch screens, voice activated screens, augmented glasses… – except that now the speed is phenomenal and requires a learner mind-set to keep up. We know today that learning might happen anywhere, any time, any place, with anyone, and that it is not just about ‘learning stuff’. The role of the teacher is as important today, as it has ever been. Learning is about ‘something’, and learners, whatever age, need support to develop their understandings of that ‘something’. Because of this, a learner orientated mind-set is necessary if you believe (as Professor Jane Gilbert, and others do) that education’s core purpose is intellectual development in a particular social context for a particular social purpose. Isn’t this the message of our framework for teaching, and the bedrock vision described in our New Zealand Curriculum? And are we not all aspiring to be confident, connected, actively involved lifelong learners? That there may be some teachers waiting for the Holy Grail of the ‘e’ in learning to be delivered unto them is concerning, because there is no Holy Grail, and delivery is now self-service. Delivery is through a learner mind-set, this is what matters most now. We know that aspects of education can be challenging for some educators, particularly how we adapt our physical and virtual spaces and harness the use of technology to bring people together in new ways. But ‘being in the valley of understanding’ is part of learning, as are missteps as we climb out of the valley and up another hill again. With a self-help learner mind-set educators can aspire to those lofty mountains.
Dr Wendy Kofoed @newmarketschool
As educators we are tasked with ensuring we have the knowledge and skills necessary to do the work we do, whatever the context. We have been fortunate in New Zealand to have a plethora of professional learning opportunities available from the late nineties that has supported a focus on building our capabilities with ICT tools and digital learning, education service companies have provided much opportunity, and more recently we can grow our skills more informally using the numerous resources available freely on the web. And, there is nothing wrong with having a chat with a mate over a cup of tea. I don’t use the words face-to-face, communication just is, whatever its form. We are onto our third or fourth version of an ICT/digital/e-learning self-assessment framework, where once again we can map our progress. In those early days we focused on our aptitude to create documents in Word or Excel, saving, backing- up, using games to support learning, then moved on to the use of the internet and e-mail, and more latterly its all about social media, curating, Google docs and so on. The main difference between the framework used today and the one I first used in 1999 is that today’s version is digital and inclusive of a wider audience. The provision of laptops for teachers has also fast-tracked our opportunities to learn and engage, to become motivated and excited, and yes, an ipad or chromebook to play with helps as well. Pre-service programmes at the universities have also provided the opportunities for new teachers with self-help mind-sets to be strong in being self-help learners. Given the high levels of support available, we are in a great place in New Zealand to build the broad capabilities of all learners. Support for educators’ learning, readily available over the last twenty years or so, has been vital in providing a plethora of opportunities to grow our knowledge of key aspects of our work. Educators are not a dying breed, not reduced to facilitation or being guides on the side, because our learners still need much help to grow their capabilities in a range of areas – capabilities in citizenship, leadership, thinking, values education, creativity, and don’t forget support to build resilience, or in how to be kind to others.
Dr Wendy Kofoed @newmarketschool
As educators, these opportunities to help us grow our understanding is much needed in the short-term. Why? We are on the crest of a huge wave, a time of a tsunami of a paradigm shift in the ways we teach and learn, so no lolling on the beach please, get in the water. This wave has been forming over a number of years, and educators having the mind-set to own their learning is vital if they are to stay on their boards. Rapid change is now a constant, time and place are no longer obstacles to learning, and many educators are seizing the moment and hacking their learning (doing it their way), accessing rich opportunities to learn. Our lives are digital, it is what it is. What an exciting time to be an educator, yes, even when the undertow and currents are strong, and a dumping off our boards likely. We educators are not empty vessels – but strong and capable self-helpers, capable of ensuring we have the capabilities to do the work we love. Educators are models of learning, and we know that learners that have control of their own learning learn best, so please, no ‘ducators’ need apply.
References Rachel Bolstad and Jane Gilbert et al (2012). Supporting future-orientated learning and teaching – a New Zealand perspective, NZCER. Jane Gilbert, Inaugural professorial address, AUT, Sept, 2014. The New Zealand Curriculum (2007). Ministry of Education, Wellington.
Dr Wendy Kofoed @newmarketschool
(Modern) Learning Environments By: Annemarie Hyde I'll be honest. It's taken me a while to explore this topic, for two reasons: I took it literally. I was in an existing, older environment, with no power over changing "how we do things here." The term grates on me. It's another bit of jargon. It's fashionable. It's a trendy term to throw around. Sorry Stephen Heppell, Mark Osborne and others who have been part of this conversation for ages. It wasn't in my "to do" pile. I fell into the trap. Modern Learning Environments are not about the age of the school, the amount of glass, the trendy green, geometric, vinyl ottomans or the orange, corduroy bean bags. It's about how kids want to learn. Actually, about how each of us want to learn, including me. A light goes on. I start to take notice. The twitter stream starts to ripple with how teachers in traditional schools are recreating their classrooms. Anne Keneally uses her efellow year to explore modern learning environments and I send out a challenge in our school for teachers to get their students to redesign the classrooms. Not much changes. It is not that simple when you have a long tradition of classroom layout in your heads - even for the students. It's about deep and meaningful inquiry into how we like to learn. Without that, we fall into recreating traditional models or being mesmerised by the furniture catalogues and all that lime coloured vinyl - which our budget won't cover. Sigh. But it's not about the trappings. Annemarie Hyde @mrs_hyde
The word modern though, does conjure up a particular look. But how long will "modern" be modern? I've seen a traditional classroom stuffed full of modern furniture that was showcased as a modern learning environment. I've seen an older block with walls punched out to make open spaces and one end furnished with old, donated, comfy sofas. Another modern learning environment. We really need to delve into how we like to learn. We need that other modern gem, "student agency." We need learner voice and I'm a learner too, so why not start with me? liked school. I liked collaborating at school. I didn't think much of any of my classrooms; cold, rattly, grafittied, wooden chairs that ate your tights. For individual work, I preferred to wait till I got home. One of my favourite places was spread out on the floor with books all around me. I wanted space and I wanted it on my own. When I was reading I stayed in my small bedroom or tucked myself into a sunny corner of our sun porch, another private, enclosed space. Hmmm. My own kids begged me to be allowed to come home to study, especially in their senior years, nearing exam time. The school was too rigid in its timetable, the teachers were boring, they were reviewing stuff they already knew, other kids were mucking around...it all sounded very familiar. I have to say I was torn between meeting their needs and being a school leader who couldn't condone truancy! So let's look at that middle word: "learning". That's the key. Where do we learn best, as opposed to "do school"? Where you learn might not be where I learn. Whether extrovert or introvert we have different needs and at different times. And how do we learn?
Annemarie Hyde @mrs_hyde
I love to discuss things to clarify my own thinking; I read and I write to reflect. I like listening to other experts in their fields - but I want to choose to listen to them and I can't be under stress to take it in. I need to be well fed and watered, warm but not too warm and be able to at least, for a time, shut out any worries in my life. I like to be in an ordered environment; my room has to be tidy wherever I am. Sometimes I want background noise and sometimes I need silence. I want time to consider. And does "environment" mean a building? I've talked about the spaces I like. But how else do I learn? I love my digital devices. I love that they allow me to connect, converse, collaborate anywhere I want to: on the sofa, in my car, in the doctor's waiting room...I love that I can talk with someone in Singapore or Orlando. I love that the only barrier about time is that I need to sleep sometimes when people are working elsewhere in the world. I love that I can replay or rewind that learning if I can't be there. I love that I can learn anywhere anytime. I love the word ubiquitous. It rolls off the tongue. So now I'm watching how you want to learn. If you choose to play Minecraft, could that be a learning environment for you? Why am I spoiling it if I call it a learning environment? Is learning only a school activity that has been prescribed in a curriculum document or examination prerequisite? Of course not! Gone are the days when a school leader told me that it was unsuitable to call a game at school a game. It needed to be called a "learning activity". Oh dear. That sort of says that fun is not allowed. We know better. We acknowledge that learning happens through play: life lessons like collaboration, creative thinking, problem solving, give and take, communication, disappointment, resilience, all take place in the sandpit. Hang on - these are pretty important tools that a citizen needs in their kete.
Annemarie Hyde @mrs_hyde
And what of the teacher? How does that role fit in to a real learning environment? I think of the teachers who have had the biggest influence on me: ● ●
My form 2 teacher who allowed a small group,of us to write our plays. We were fully immersed and presented them to real parent audiences. The junior high teacher who let us explore the imaginary back worlds of novels like "The Sword in the Stone" about Merlin and Arthur.
My mother who always supported learning by attending every interview; who filled a chest of drawers with cuttings and project material.
My friend Sara who showed me that every four year old's "why" question was important and who could discuss why clouds were pink at sunset and why the sky was blue. Our kids were allowed to paint their faces and dig huge mud holes in her backyard.
The adults were there for the children: making sure they were safe, picking up the pieces, refereeing disagreements, scaffolding understanding, modelling good practice, making sure there were available resources, watching that the children ate and dressed warmly. So if we learn through play, by being in comfortable, flexible spaces, or even uncomfortable outdoor risk-taking environments, face to face or virtually, in the real world or in worlds we have created online, let's get on with it. We are individuals and don't go out into the world known as boxed sets: "class of 2014." It's time for real conversations about learning and the learning environments that have always worked. Forget the modern. Learning is not schooling. And modern becomes "how we do it around here" too quickly. And that's the point.
Annemarie Hyde @mrs_hyde
Redundant Adjectives: Pedagogy’s built-in understanding of being future-focused To all intents and purposes, the New Zealand Curriculum’s opening words are those of the overarching vision for the document: “Young people who will be confident, connected, actively involved, lifelong learners.” Note the use of the future tense. This verb tense continues over the page where the stated vision is fleshed out into five bullet points including: “Our vision is for young people who will be creative, energetic, and enterprising”. Thus, the intention of the curriculum document is to “set the direction for student learning” and that direction is one pointing firmly into the future. A further way that the New Zealand Curriculum explicitly sets its direction as being future-focused is through its principles which, “embody beliefs about what is important and desirable in school curriculum – nationally and locally.” One of these principles is that, “the curriculum encourages students to look to the future by exploring such future-focused issues as sustainability, citizenship, enterprise, and globalisation.” It is clear then that the New Zealand Curriculum is an aspirational document and one which seeks to address the future needs of Kiwi kids. Pedagogy, while a separate concept to ‘curriculum’, is similarly forward-facing. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the noun as, “The art, occupation, or practice of teaching. Also: the theory or principles of education; a method of teaching based on such a theory.” If you like, curriculum is the ‘what’ of teaching, and pedagogy is the ‘how’. Generally speaking, the meeting point of the two is schools and the main medium for delivery is teachers. Therefore, while not synonymous, the two concepts have the same basis of intention: to shape young people into the kind of adults a society deems desirable.
Philippa Nicoll Antipas @AKeenReader
Thus, in my opinion, the phrase ‘future-focused pedagogy’ is redundant because the future is already inherently implied and understood in the use of the word ‘pedagogy’: schools and teachers are naturally focused on developing students’ capacities and capabilities. And these are the capacities and capabilities that will best serve them as adults and future citizens in society. Needless to say there are considerable value-laden assumptions behind what kind of adults and future citizens are seen to be necessary by curriculum writers and the research they draw upon. But all of this, in my opinion, begs an important question to explore: what kind of future is implied by our pedagogy? One of these visions for the future is an industrial, production-based model. Most recently Sugata Mitra has argued that our current school system was designed with elegant efficiency by the Victorians who wanted to produce future workers for their industrial age factories. Students in this era experienced a factory-style pedagogy appropriate for molding factory-style workers. Young people were viewed as empty vessels to be filled with the knowledge they would require when they needed it. Curricula prescribed the knowledge that young people ought to know, and, to some degree, ought to be able to do with that knowledge. All students learnt the same thing in the same way for the same kind of future. But we are no longer in the Industrial Age. We are now in the Knowledge Age where “knowledge and ideas are the main source of economic growth”. This change also signals a shift in what ‘knowledge’ is. We also understand a lot more about how learning occurs. Students no longer need a sole diet of ‘just in case’ learning but rather need ‘just in time’ learning: knowing how to learn when learning is required; how to critically navigate a glut of information. This is an entirely different vision of the future. Rachel Bolstad and Jane Gilbert talk about knowledge as having metaphorically shifted from a noun to a verb: “as a resource to do things with, not an object to be mastered.” Students need to know how to interact with, and build knowledge. And the pedagogy needed to empower this capacity in students is fundamentally different.
Philippa Nicoll Antipas @AKeenReader
The 2007 New Zealand Curriculum document reflects this difference. While, as already noted, curriculum is not pedagogy as it is not a description or formula for how to teach, there is substantial overlap between the two. The focus in the New Zealand Curriculum on the five Key Competencies of managing self, understanding language, symbols and text, participating and contributing, relating to others, and thinking, implicitly requires a different pedagogy from that operating in an Industrial Age model. I urge New Zealand educators to concentrate their focus on this ‘front half’ of the document as a signal to shift attention away from content and instead onto skills and dispositions. But let us now return to the question posed at the beginning: What kind of future is implied by our pedagogy? While the very nature of the future is that it is definitively unknowable until it is the present, we tell stories of what the future is ‘likely’ to be all the time: hover cars, robot overlords, post-apocalyptic wasteland, living on Mars under a great glass dome… Keri Facer, in her important book Learning Futures, explores some of these potential futures ahead of us. In doing so, she emphasises that these stories of potential futures are precisely that: narratives. And the nature of narratives is that they can be manipulated and changed, that they are not set in concrete. The future is the consequence of a whole series of decisions that are made right now. As Facer says, “The future is not something that is done to us, but an ongoing process in which we can intervene.” Pedagogy, with its in-built understanding of being future-focused, is one of those intervention methods. We don’t know what kind of future lies ahead of us, but we are pretty sure of what it isn’t likely to be: a Victorian manufacturing plant. Therefore we must ensure that our pedagogy is future building, a term that, “implies we have power and agency to create the future we want.” Certainly the intention behind the New Zealand Curriculum, and its Key Competencies in particular, reflects this. I believe that teaching is an expression of hope for the future. That our learners not only become “confident, connected, actively involved, lifelong learners”, but adopt this vision as part of their currentidentity. That our learners do not become citizens, but see themselves as citizens already. Thus, while the adjectival phrase ‘future-focused’ is indeed redundant to qualify the noun ‘pedagogy’, we must make sure that our pedagogy is an expression of this hope. Philippa Nicoll Antipas @AKeenReader
Bibliography (To access a version of this blogpost with footnotes, please click here.)
● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●
Claire Amos, “Futures Thinking and the Future of Education.” Accessed online 20/9/14 Rachel Bolstad and Jane Gilbert et al, “Supporting future-oriented learning and teaching – a New Zealand perspective”, NZCER, 2012 Rachel Bolstad and Jane Gilbert, Disciplining and drafting, or 21st century learning? Rethinking the New Zealand senior secondary curriculum for the future, NZCER, 2008 Keri Facer, Learning Futures: Education, technology and social change, Routledge, 2011 Rosemary Hipkins, Rachel Bolstad, Sally Boyd, and Sue McDowall, Key Competencies for the Future, NZCER, 2014 The New Zealand Curriculum, Ministry of Education, 2007. Accessed online 20/9/14 Sugata Mitra, “We Need Schools…Not Factories“. Accessed online 20/9/14 OED, Accessed online 20/9/14
Philippa Nicoll Antipas @AKeenReader
Are we Digital Citizens, or rather Citizens in an increasingly Digital World? The “Digital Natives” discussion has been going on for many years (1). I generally subscribe to the definition of “A digital native is a person who was born during or after the general introduction of digital technologies and through interacting with digital technology from an early age, has a greater comfort level using it.” A more narrow definition of this term to include all persons born after 1985 has regularly been criticised as it does not take account of the variability in exposure to and confidence in use of technology (2). Acknowledging the variability and at the same time the efforts our schools, communities and society are making to allow all our young people to access technology, I belief it is fair to say that in many of our schools we are teaching Digital Natives, and many of we teachers are Digital Immigrants (that is we started using technology later and are less comfortable with it than our young people). Attached to the notion of being a citizen is the term citizenship (3). There are different sub-definitions of citizenship, one thing they seem to have in common is the notion that rights and responsibilities are attached to this citizenship. Where the digital world, which our students increasingly frequent, differs from the real world is that with just a mouse-click you could be visiting any state on earth without even knowing. How do you know what rights and responsibilities apply in this context? Who makes the rules, who enforces them? Does the breaking of rules necessarily preclude from participating in the digital world or is adhering to the rights and responsibilities a voluntary act?
Monika Kern @BeLchick1
Commonly we speak of Digital Citizenship in regards to rights and responsibilities in the virtual world. In New Zealand we have come to understand digital citizenship to include digital literacy and cybersafety skills as well as values and key competencies from the New Zealand Curriculum: According to Netsafe (4), a digital citizen ● is a confident and capable user of ICT ● uses technologies to participate in educational, cultural, and economic activities ● uses and develops critical thinking skills in cyberspace ● is literate in the language, symbols, and texts of digital technologies ● is aware of ICT challenges and can manage them effectively ● uses ICT to relate to others in positive, meaningful ways ● demonstrates honesty and integrity and ethical behaviour in their use of ICT ● respects the concepts of privacy and freedom of speech in a digital world ● contributes and actively promotes the values of digital citizenship This definition of digital citizen appeals to me as it shows how there is much more to it than simply cybersafety. However, the anonymity of the global digital world combined with its infinite memory leaves careless users with a digital footprint that is nearly impossible to remove and can affect their life both in the virtual as the real world. The advent of the access to the digital world (5) has led to an explosion in internet use (6). Via social networks, more people than ever before can connect with each other and can work towards a common good (7). Understandably, some users are struggling with the anonymous nature, with the sheer size of the internet, the amount of information available. It is easier to fulfil your responsibility when you are face-to-face with someone, when there is little temptation around you to make you wander off task.
Monika Kern @BeLchick1
However, the world-wide-web, with its multitude of colourful visuals and enticing games, apps and programmes, provides lots of distraction and temptation to our young and even to older people as they navigate their original task. Be honest, how often have you been on another pathway when listening to a speaker in a workshop? The argument can be made that not everyone has access to digital tools and information hence the term ‘digital citizenship’ should remain. However, the use of the phrases: ‘connected [...] learners’, ‘effective users of communication tools’, ‘international citizens’ in the vision of the New Zealand Curriculum (8) makes it very clear in my opinion that we are tasked with preparing all our young people to actively participate in our increasingly digital world. Do we really need digital as the descriptor? Why not just call it citizenship? Let’s look back at the Netsafe description. By removing the references to ‘ICT’ or ‘digital’ you end up with the description of a citizen we’d probably all agree with: ● is confident and capable ● participates in educational, cultural, and economic activities ● uses and develops critical thinking skills ● is literate in language, symbols, and texts ● is aware of challenges and can manage them effectively ● relates to others in positive, meaningful ways ● demonstrates honesty and integrity and ethical behaviour ● respects the concepts of privacy and freedom of speech ● contributes and actively promotes the values of citizenship
Monika Kern @BeLchick1
Our students and we are no longer just citizens of a country, New Zealand, we are also citizens of a digital, global world. To separate citizenship and digital citizenship is no longer relevant in a world that is permeated by digital use; teaching them as two separate topics makes them harder to grasp and less embedded. Keeping ‘digital citizenship’ and ‘citizenship’ separate is continuing to live in the world of the ‘digital immigrants’, not preparing our young people for the future where digital tools are as accepted and taken for granted as today’s electric lights and flushing toilets. To be responsible citizens in our increasingly digital world, we need to fulfill our rights and responsibilities in all settings we frequent, both physical and digital spaces. Footnotes: 1.
Mark Prensky. Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants 2001 http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants %20-%20Part1.pd
"Citizenship is the status of a person recognized under the custom of law of a state that bestows on that person (called a citizen) the rights and duties of citizenship". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizenship
Monika Kern @BeLchick1
Digital Learning Tools and Modern learning technologies
Digital learning tools are seen by many people as those tools that are in some way different to other learning tools and need to be treated and discussed as such. “Let’s go to the digital learning zone” or “Now it’s time for class to use their iPads” are common announcements in many schools. Maybe we should stop saying digital, 21st Century and modern. I wonder if this mindset might be damaging to learning. What are the issues? In the developed world, Digital technologies are embedded in all life experiences and ‘embedded’ is the key term here. Many schools set themselves apart from this life by making these latest learning tools somewhat mystical or special. Schools purchase class sets of iPads or Chromebooks and then allocate time slots for their use. Lengthy deliberations take place before Youtube or other social-media is permitted into school sites. Draconian blocking policies are written regarding the specific apps learners are or are not allowed to use in school (here’s an app kids use to get past the blocks). Punishments are organised for those learners found “off-task,” a judgement of “bad choice” applied to the student that is never applied to the teacher who designed the task being avoiding. Teachers do have a tendency to design tasks that they would enjoy or that work for their own way of thinking. On this matter, I would advise teachers check out Universal Design for Learning and the work of Katie Novak, Ed.D.
Richard Wells @iPadWells 19
The development of computer labs or “iPad hours” is something that whiteboards, pens, books and other learning tools never experienced. Many schools are still isolating digital experiences as something special and separate to the ‘norm’. This appears strange to the so called “digital natives.” They are “natives” not because they are naturally expert but because they have not experienced a world without regular contact with digital technologies, such as digital TV. What takes place in the digital lives of these ‘natives’ is routinely unspectacular and only commands the same level of interest as any non-digital thing they might do. This does not stop schools and institutions reacting to those more extreme stories that hit the headlines or become staffroom gossip when deigning policies and procedures. Individual teachers too use their personal fears or lack of confidence with devices and technologies, such as cloud computing, to restrict the opportunities of the learners in their charge. The format for learning that is most comfortable to the teacher can reduce the depth some students might reach and standardisation is still seen by many teachers as the only manageable way to assess the How did “digital is separate” develop? Perspective I think this derives from the experiences the teachers had when schools made the transition to using digital tools, a transition young people today never experienced. They never had to wait 10 minutes for dial-up or a ZX Spectrum game to load! I try not to be amazed when some of my students are sketchy about what exactly a CD is. The students so often seem surprised by viewpoints (often hostile) that schools develop towards digital tools. Although there are many individual exceptions (I know many personally), it might be that the generations that did not enjoy playing with digital technologies as young people, don’t have as friendly or playful a relationship with them and thus take much more cautious and smaller steps.Photo Credit learners. Richard Wells @iPadWells 20
Costs The cost of these tools is also a complicated issue. I have heard many discussions about how buying an iPad is not like buying a pencil. There are many examples, such as this one, where schools prioritising the need to make access to digital tools as ubiquitous as pencils and paper, find ways to fund them, even when serving the poorest communities. Cost is often used as an excuse to bolster the pre existing reservations held by the adult school community rather than be an absolute obstacle itself. Primary vs. Secondary The primary / elementary sector are doing better at making a more life-reflecting adoption than secondary / high schools. It showed recently when it was reported at Ulearn, the biggest New Zealand education conference, that only 15% of delegates discussing current best practice were from the secondary sector. Why is this? I have much experience in training secondary school teachers to say that the power base they wish to retain as masters of their own subject silos, encourages them to shy away from any tool or pedagogy that might readdress the balance of control over the learning in the room. It doesn’t help that the universities are often as silo’d and traditional and demand more traditional preparation and evidence of learning. Managing mindsets Although the pace to adopt digital devices is relatively rapid and there seems to be various understandings that they are either necessary or seemingly ‘ the ‘thing to do’, I wonder how schools will manage the mindsets of teachers and parents to not treat them as the only tool required or a special set of tools to release at particular hours of the day.
Richard Wells @iPadWells 21
If schools continue to treat these tools differently they risk operating a school environment that becomes alien to the students and thus harder to learn in. Young people have expectations regarding the ubiquitous nature of these tools and do not view them as special but just part of doing anything. A recent example of this was when my BYOD class showed far more excitement that they could write on the windows to plan their project than the fact that a video documentary was an option for the outcome. Not special but expected I can tell you one fact and that is that learning does not happen just because you’re holding a device or connected to the internet. In fact the reasons why successful deeper learning takes place have never changed, regardless of our rush to be excited about the web, social media and iPads. Young people don’t want to do everything on devices but do have experiences or witness examples daily of their effectiveness for communication, active learning and creativity output. Young people understand digital tools as a constant option on a Smörgåsbord of numerous tools to carry out all sorts of tasks both in life and for learning. All tools offer potential, the trick is to keep an open mind and not treat one tool differently based on one’s own skill set or experience. Big thank you to Beth Holland (@brholland) for giving me feedback and advice on this post before publishing. Checkout her work at edtechteacher.org.
Richard Wells @iPadWells 22
The death of the digital community? “My seven year old daughter knows that her father congregates with a family of invisible friends who seem to gather in his computer. Sometimes he talks to them, even if nobody else can see them. And she knows that these invisible friends sometimes show up in the flesh, materializing from the next block or the other side of the world.” – Rheingold These opening words hark back to 1983, when Howard Rheingold wrote the foreword for Granovetter’s (1983) research on the strong and weak ties that bind us in communities. Over twenty years later, we are still interested in how we work together as people, particularly in the fluid, online/offline world in which many of us now exist. For many, the magic of ‘invisible friends’ online is what keeps us loyal to communities of people with whom, without digital technologies, we might never be able to connect. We are also fourteen years on since Rheingold (2000) wrote his own book about the then-unusual ‘virtual communities’. Has the time come to put the prefix of ‘digital’ or ‘virtual’ out to pasture? This is the question at the heart of this discussion. Community [noun] / com|mu¦nity / kəˈmjuːnɪti What do you think of when you read the word ‘community’? A group of people coming together to help one another? A gathering for sharing ideas? A local neighbourhood of mutually support? One of my favourite community is ‘NZ Spearos’, a group who come together on Facebook to discuss ideas about spearfishing (and I don’t even spearfish;). Heated debates on best practices for diving with a buddy, catch quotas and the merits of particular locations mark this active group out as a genuine community. And many of them have never met face-to-face. Karen Melhuish Spencer @virtuallykaren 23
Whatever your mental model, a central theme of ‘community’ is one of reciprocity – some kind of symbiosis or virtuous circle in which one’s contribution supports the group and which is repaid in kind by the value generated by that same set of people. This characteristic of community is often termed as ‘social capital’; simply put, the investment of one’s time in social relations with the expectation of receiving something in return (Lin, 1999). The greater the social capital of an individual or community, the greater the chance for improved practice and gain. Many of us benefit from being part of communities, often several, focused on hobbies, work, sport, or local interests, to list a few. To take community one step further, the seminal research of Lave and Wenger (1991) defined communities of practice as groups united around making improvements to an area of shared interest or practice, with a shared discourse and purpose. So, what is enhanced – if anything – if this group is online? It might be argued that, regardless of the way in which we come together, be it digital or over the garden fence, it is the act of collaboration that is central, not the means by which we do it. Is the term ‘digital’, in these days of ubiquitous connection superfluous? In the definitions given above, the mode of coming together, digital or otherwise, seem irrelevant. In fact, the danger here is that the ‘digital’ gets all the emphasis, is privileged as somehow crucial to the definition, while the community focus is an after thought.
Karen Melhuish Spencer @virtuallykaren 24
Digital community – or ‘digital death spiral’? Increasingly, the word ‘community’ is bandied out quite loosely. I have heard people talk of their own Twitter followers, who may never have met each other, as ‘their community’ – or a collection of members of an online group. I even know of an example of ‘community’ being applied to collections of static resources online. These days, when it seems easy to bust past the Dunbar 150 on Facebook, it can feel like we are surrounded by ‘digital community’, when in fact, much of the engagement can be superficial, fleeting, cheerfully brief, two-second clickbait, a ‘digital death spiral’ (Tanner, 2013). Perhaps these are the new ‘invisible friends’ that Rheingold referred to 30 years ago. Social networks can certainly lull us into feeling like we are in a permanently humming community. But we must be careful not to confuse ’network’ and ‘community’. The image below shows that, in a community, one’s relationship and commitment to the group is to the fore, and often the relationships are richer for it. Whereas, in a social network site, the individual user is at the heart of the structure and everyone experiences the network through a profile and set of connections that revolve entirely around them. Community is more than activity traps or busy-work on Twitter. A few posts to an online thread, a quick chat on Google+, or the share of a photo on Instagram doth not a community make. In the same way, handing out leaflets around the street doesn’t lead to change as much as a shared act of environmental conservation that brings real improvement to a neighbourhood. Karen Melhuish Spencer @virtuallykaren 25
There is no doubt that the plethora of digital technologies, the ease with which we can connect and communicate through high-speed connection, mobile devices, integrated multi-function platforms (sign-in-to-everything-with Google, anyone?) have transformed the way we can come together. We have a 24-7 doorway to the ‘invisible friends’ with whom we wish to connect and work. Our conversations can be managed more flexibly with the time constraints lifted, and more inclusively, if I can choose my mode and media. We can archive conversations, preserve them for new community members, review, edit, rewind, reflect. The reach of a collaborative act can be global – and the size of the community can be vast (or niche, or both). The result of cooperation in these digital community spaces can be amplified through the socially networked spaces through which we move – blogging, curating, Tweeting – can all spread the work of a community beyond its boundaries by the ‘connector feeders’ who move cross-community. The digital technologies ease that cross-over between groups and ideas. There are certainly screeds of research papers that attest to the vital importance of specialised skills to support community facilitation and growth. Digital communities certainly appear to have special characteristics and opportunities, compared to a face-to-face, geolocated community. Put simply, the use of digital technologies is the central enabler to allow people to connect and work together when they could never have done so otherwise. Even so, it is still the reason for connecting that is key here. Karen Melhuish Spencer @virtuallykaren 26
Perhaps 30 years ago we would have said that a virtual or digital community was remarkable, unusual, innovative. These days, though, for many communities digital technologies are simply a normal way to have a conversation. Indeed, for many of us, there is an expectation that we can access information or other members digitally as well as/instead of face-to-face. I would argue that the blended nature of many communities, part face-to-face, part online, is so normalised as to make the prefix ‘digital’ irrelevant. Removing the phrase ‘digital’ refocuses us on the purpose and drive of working with others – and I’d also like to argue for a renewed clarity as to what ‘community’ denotes. Purpose in the driving seat Instead, we should be looking for a shift from a focus on digital to a focus on purpose. Clay Shirky (2008)’s thinking is useful here. A shift from the digitally-easy acts of sharing and socializing towards actions that encourage cooperation and collaborative action that enhances, changes or positively shifts practice. Let the technology merely be in service to those goals. For those of us in education, the notion of community is what sustains our practice, digital or otherwise. Whether it is the community of whānau / aiga at the heart of our learners’ lives, or a community of educators with whom we reflect and gently stretch our understandings, beliefs and practice. It is incredibly hard to be an effective, adaptive modern educator if you are alone and isolated. Karen Melhuish Spencer @virtuallykaren 27
What the modern educator needs, in my view, is the chance to grow digital skills and competencies so we feel able to reach out to our professional communities, and then to give back and sustain that community over time. If we must focus on digital technologies, letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s explore how they can quietly enable our communities to be more open, more inclusive and more accessible to all than in the past. That is our challenge now.
Letâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s talk about: 1. 2. 3.
How can we work together to design and grow our communities so technologies support inclusive, culturally intelligent ways of working together? How can we stretch our notion of online collaborative spaces to shift from sharing to collaborative action? How might we evolve our own online practices and confidence so we can make active contribution to the educational communities that feed our profession?
Karen Melhuish Spencer @virtuallykaren 28
References ● ● ● ● ● ●
Granovetter, M. (1983). The Strength of Weak Ties: A Network Theory Revisited.Sociological Theory 1: 201–233. doi:10.2307/202051. JSTOR 202051 Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lin, N. (1999). Building a network theory of social capital. Connections, 22(1), 28–51. Retrieved from http://www.insna.org/PDF/Connections/v22/1999_I-1-4.pdf Rheingold, H. (2000). The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Electronic Frontier. London: MIT Press Shirky, C. (2008) Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations. Penguin Press. Tanner, S. (2013). Keynote for the National Digital Forum, NZ.
Image credits ● ● ● ● ●
Nancy White, History of online communities opensource.com, making community software sustainable A comparison of the relative position of an individual member in a community and a social network (Melhuish Spencer, 2014) Google Hangout for #TeachMeetNX #cenz14 – Melhuish Spencer Will Lion, Communities already exist
Karen Melhuish Spencer @virtuallykaren
Taking away the descriptor – Collaboration “Alone we can do so little; together we can do so much”. —Helen Keller When we act individually we are limited by our weaknesses. No matter how skilled an individual may be, he or she will still exhibit weaknesses. By the same token, we all have strengths, and not everyone’s strengths are equal to one another. In this way, when banding together, weaknesses are minimised and strengths of all are accentuated. This post is my contributing chapter for the special Connected Educator Month project#edbooknz – an e-book launched by Sonja Van Schaijik. The #CENZ14 event will be held on Friday 31 October 8-9pm (UT + 12 hrs) Click here for details Nine connected NZ educators have come together to produce this e-book. The idea …. Take away the jargon, get rid of the descriptors and get to the heart of the word in relation to education. Today I will be exploring the term “Digital Collaboration” and digging deep to the meaning of it be removing the prefix ‘Digital’. What better way to start this off, than with some open questions from Sonja Van Schaijik: “Without connecting with our learners, can we educate effectively? Without connections, can we collaborate effectively? Without collaboration can we share as effectively?” Let’s dig a little deeper …
Craig Kemp @mrkempnz
I have a unique point of view on this concept as I am a globally connected collaborator living and breathing through the connections I make in the online world. I am an international teacher in Singapore who has experience in both public and private education systems in New Zealand and Singapore. I want to dive into what collaboration is and focus on the ‘constants’, the things that don’t change no matter the context.1. Collaboration (noun) kəlabəˈreɪʃn/ “the action of working with someone to produce something” The way we throw around the term ‘digital’ in today’s 21st Century Learning Environments is worrying. It is used to describe how and why things work the way they do. Really, the digital revolution has passed us by. We are now into an age where we look at digital technologies as tools to connect with the world around us. All too often, we forget one of the most important ingredients. Purpose! Without a purpose the meaning is lost. “The purpose of life is to collaborate for a common cause; the problem is nobody seems to know what it is.” – Gerhard Gschwandtner This quote points out the importance of setting clear goals and objectives within a collaboration. Without clear goals, everyone’s own idea of what the goal should be will come to the forefront, thus breaking up the collaborative efforts. defined at the outset. The ‘constants’ of collaboration are: ●
People – although collaborations occur within nearly all forms of life on Earth, today we are focussing on the context of education. Without people, collaboration can not occur. It is one of the core elements of an effective collaboration and does not change (one of the 2P’s) Craig Kemp @mrkempnz
● ● ●
Common goal – when collaborating on a task or activity all participants must agree to the common goal and work together to achieve it Purpose – why we do what we do! Without a purpose there is no point in collaborating (one of the 2P’s) Tools – collaborative tools are used to ensure the process is smooth. Some examples of tools include: pen and paper, discussion and digital video tools (e.g. Skype).These ‘constants’ are the things we see in our daily lives that don’t change. As an educator, it is critical that we always remember the ‘constants’. Digital technologies are amazing, but they are one of many tools available to collaborate and learn with. Learners need the opportunity to collaborate with a clear purpose with clear goals.
I love what Rebecca Sweeney mentions in her blog about collaboration. She states “For learners, the benefits of leaders and teachers continuing the collaboration across schools outweigh the benefits of schools working alone to keep a competitive edge”. This is a good lesson to us all – think outside of ourselves and our own school and think to what really matters. That is, creating a better education for the students in our schools. What does it take? Collaboration. Collaboration with the best in the industry. Collaboration with other schools. Collaboration with experts in the field that we need to improve. Why can’t schools work together to develop their unique strengths rather than work against each other in competition? I believe that at the heart of collaboration are the 2 P’s. People and Purpose. Without either one of these, collaboration does not exist. They only work when the other is there. Without a purpose it is just 2 or more people talking about a topic or goal and without people there is a goal with no-one to achieve it. In the context of education, we see collaboration occurring in the classroom with a digital influence more often. Unfortunately, all too often in our classrooms, the digital influence takes away from the 2 P’s of collaboration. Teachers see the shiny new tools and the flashy new ‘apps’ to support collaboration and they use them because ‘it makes everything better/easier’. Use digital tools! But never forget the 2 P’s of collaboration that tie it all together. Craig Kemp @mrkempnz
Can I see you, teacher? Connected Educator Month
Listen teacher, listen to me. Don’t look away. See my eyes they hold messages that make you understand me. etc Emma Kruse Vaai. Are you a 21st century teacher? Are you a future focussed educator using effective pedagogy? Do you teach in a modern learning environment and use digital tools? Are you conscious of digital citizenship? Are you an active member of a virtual community and use social media to make connections and broadcast? Do you foster digital collaboration with your elearners? What?..... #halt! Let’s flip that learning? We must be connected educators because we relate with all of the above… Right? So what is a Connected Educator? Let me carry out a personal inquiry. October has been branded “Connected Educator Month”. I was determined to unpack this coined phrase. I have found dropping the term ‘connected’ a challenge, considering this has been my inquiry for 2014. I relied on connecting for this EdbookNZ project. I crowdsourced for this collaborative project using social media and invited educators to give up their precious time and to help me write a book that would debunk several current educational terms being bandied around. I envisaged we might make a difference to education by disrupting some of the current thinking taking place. Well goodness me my learning community responded.
Sonya Van Schaijik @vanschaijik
Initially I wrote a blog post to clarify my understanding and help me unpack the term ‘Connected Educator’ in readiness for sharing my learning with colleagues at ULearn14 with my principal Dr Wendy Kofoed. So if you are looking for a definition of Connected Educator then go to this link and read a carefully thought out definition there. Access the ULearn video and watch the discussion or rewind our Ulearn slides to demonstrate your connectedness. Connections can take many forms. I had a lightbulb moment when my SOLO Taxonomy mentor said, “Sometimes educator blogs read like a description and very few take their reflection to an analytical level.” Sometimes I need a prod to help me with my thinking and that was the prod I needed. The focus for this ‘disruptive article’ is ‘Educator’. My personal inquiry has centred around connected educators at my school and my own understanding of educator has been clarified by using the term ‘connected’ educator. I now realise that this educator does not need the term connected in front. This educator does not need a digital badge to say I am a connected educator because first and foremost I am a teacher therefore I am an educator and I am a learner too. I have my teaching certificate to prove this. Each year I carry out an inquiry to show I am learning. Each year I work with another cohort of teachers and students who challenge my thinking and I, hopefully, challenge theirs. Each year I create and leave a legacy for other learners as is encouraged by the New Zealand Teachers Council. Therefore a badge is handy for this process of evidence based learning. Considering all this learning as inquiry that has taken place, should I have focussed on the educator as a learner? A large part of my own learning results from online collaboration. The online learning environment continues to shape my thinking and the connections I make shape my learning. For my reworked contribution to #EdBookNZ as part of Connected Educator Month, my topic is ‘Educator’ - I have stripped away the term connected as I believe it is not needed to describe being a teacher because to educate requires connection. It is a prerequisite. Without connecting with our learners, can we educate effectively? Without connections, can we collaborate effectively? Without collaboration can we share as effectively? Sonya Van Schaijik @vanschaijik
I believe connectedness is one of three concepts relevant to being an educator. At any New Zealand school, being connected requires the learner to develop a secure sense of their own identity and agency to think and work towards where their potential might lie. At my school our three values are whanaungatanga, manaakitanga, kaitiakitanga. I use these concepts and their definition to frame my current thinking around Educators. In Aotearoa New Zealand an educator understands the Maori concept of whanaungatanga which focuses on building relationships with each other, the community and our children. Therefore an educator knows how to use the managed online learning tools to find people and knows how to connect with them. They think carefully about the dynamics of interactions. They use social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Skype, Google+, LinkedIn, and other tools to make connections and to build their own personal learning community. They actively seek other New Zealand educators to connect and build learning relationships with. In Aotearoa New Zealand an educator understands the concept of Manaakitanga or Generosity of Spirit. This is about developing the ability to walk in othersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; shoes which includes seeing issues from othersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; perspectives and thinking carefully about the dynamics of interactions. It is about cultural awareness. An educator knows how to use and take the tools from their kete to move their practice forward. They know how to get the learning needed to improve the craft of teaching. An educator uses online tools to crowdsource to share ideas and to call for help in creating resources for their learners and for other educators. Generally they are participants in learning communities and take part in twitter chats such as #edchatnz to connect nationally and globally with other New Zealand educators. They comprehend the concept of an educational bubble and actively seek virtual chats to connect them with educators globally because they understand that sometimes the New Zealand bubble is just that, a bubble.
Sonya Van Schaijik @vanschaijik
They use a wiki, blog and or google sites as a sandbox to test their learning and show what has been learnt. They attend online New Zealand webinar such as the Virtual Learning Network monthly sessions. They participate in national online projects- such as Connected Educator Month or even better, they contribute to online projects. Even much better they take part in or create their own global collaborative project that includes their students, keeping citizenship at the heart of what takes place. They curate their own learning using Pond and make connections with other New Zealand educators to share what has been found and learnt. They know how to bring back what they have found and learnt online and share it with their school community via a reflective educator blog, a face to face discussion or via a different media. Personal learning is transparent, visible and accessible by all. In Aotearoa New Zealand an educator understands the concept of Kaitiakitanga or Guardianship for Sustainability of our world. They understand the notion of stewardship by ensuring sensitivity and thoughtfulness of actions in environments both local and distant. An educator knows how to build their community of practice so that it has active participants like guest speakers or blog authors and where everyone constructs knowledge collaboratively. They identify the voices that are silent and actively seek them out to ensure that all voices are heard. They know how to reflect on what they have learnt and make this available for all via a blog, Google Doc, wiki and or a site. They have identified video as the new text and have taken personal responsibility to learn how to craft their learning using video. An educator uses several communication tools to find people and connect with them. An educator knows how to access the learning needed to improve their own teaching. They know how to empower each other and the children that they teach to build their own learning environment. They take pride in leaving a legacy for other educators.
Sonya Van Schaijik @vanschaijik
An educator is visible online and can be identified by the work that they do with the children that they teach and with other educators through the legacy that they collaboratively create. The educatorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s attitude, knowledge and skills change as they learn. The change in their thinking can be mapped. They continuously gather and analyse data of what they are doing for quality improvement. Most importantly an educator is a professional learner who creates, contributes and converses. They know how to empower each other and their students to build their own networks to learn from and use the tools and resources that are available. They have the mindset to learn from each other, with each other, from and with the children that they teach and from and with the families/whanau of their children. So, if I assess my outcome using the levels of SOLO Taxonomy; have I clarified my thinking around what a connected educator is, elaborated on and justified my definition, prodded you to rethink the connected educator label? Have I disrupted your thinking? Have I created a new way of defining connected educator? Where to next, can an educator, without access to technology, still be a connected educator? Can they not still connect with those around them? Can they not still connect with learners, family, community? Do give me feedback because quality improvement drives my learning. For this post I thank Bridget Casse @BridgetCasse for being my disruptive friend and value her time and prodding. You can check out her blog here. http://bridgetcasse.blogspot.co.nz/
Sonya Van Schaijik @vanschaijik
Whanaungatanga Collaborative E-Book Connected Educator Month 2014 Tuatahi rā, me mihi ka tika ki tōku hoa Tīhau a Sonya Van Schaijik, nāna te kaupapa o tēnei rangitaki i tuku mai. Tuarua, ko tēnei taku rangitaki tuarua e pā ana ki te kaupapa Whanaungatanga. Anei te hononga ki te tuhinga tuatahi - Whanaungatanga I tēnei rangitaki ka matapakihia te huatau o whanaungatanga me tana hāngaitanga o te tangata ki te tangata, te tangata ki te taiao, ā te tangata ki te ao wairua! Me pēwhea au e tīmata ai tēnei kōrero.... ka hoki atu ki ngā whakataukī... he iti te kupu he nui tona whakamahukitanga! Nō reira ko te manako ia mā ngā kīpeha nei ōku whakaaro e whakaāhua. Unuhia te rito o te harakeke, kei whea te kōmako e kō? Ui mai ki ahau, 'He aha te mea nui o te Ao?' Māku e kī atu, 'He tangata, he tangata, he tangata.' Ka matua kite tēnei whakataukī i te ao mātauranga he mea whakanui i ngā tūhonotanga o tēnā tangata o tēnā hapū o tēna iwi, ā puta noa i te ao. He mauri tō ia tangata, he pukenga tō ia tangata, he wheako tō ia tangata anō nei he mana tō ia tangata, wāhine mai tāne mai! Me whakanui tātou i a tātou anō mō ngā kawenga katoa o tēnā o tēnā. I ngētehi wā he ngawari te whai hoa i ngētehi wā uaua.
Tahu Paki @TahuPaki
He tangata kaha koe ki te whai hoa? He māmā māhau ki te kōrero kanohi ki te kanohi ki ngētehi atu? Mōku ake, he uaua erangi ki te noho te tangata i tōna ake ana, kāore ia i te puta atu, kare e kore ka mokemoke! I tēnei ao hurihuri kāore he take mō te noho mokepuihi! Me whai hoa kōrerorero! Me whai hoa matapaki kaupapa! Kei a tātou te iarere tere (UFB) me ngā rauemi hangarau hei tūhonohono atu ki te ao whānui! Kei a tātou te mana! Ko au ko te awa Ko te awa ko au Kua tikina tēnei pepehā mai i ngā iwi o Te Whanganui hei whakaatu i tētehi hononga o te tangata ki te taiao! E ai ki ngā kōrero tuku iho ko te awa te puna waiora o ngēnei iwi! Mei kore te awa ka kore te tangata. Mei kore te awa ka kore hoki te whenua! Ā, ko te whenua te tūrangawaewae o te tangata. Ki te mate te whenua ka mate hoki te tangata! He paku kōrero whakatūpato hoki i roto i tēnei pepehā arā ki a tātou ngā kaitiaki o te ao! Ko te tangata te kaitiaki o tona ao mai te rangi ki te whenua mai te whenua ki te rangi! Me tiaki, me manaaki, me whakamana! Ka whakawhiti tātou ki te ao mātauranga, ā ka tere kite atu i te hāngaitanga o tēnei pepehā i te ao ako. Mena, ka kite atu te ākonga i a ia anō i tona taiao ako ka noho mauri tau, ka rite ia ki te ako, ka eke ia ki tona puhikaioreoretanga! Ki te noho honokore te ākonga ka hinga! Mā te tuakana ka tōtika te teina Ma te teina ka tōtika te tuakana He kīpeha rangiwhāwhā tēnei! He huatau rongonui kē i te ao mātauranga. Ko te nako ko te Ako, ko te nako ko te whanaungatanga! Ki te ruku whakarētō te tangata i te huatau nei ka rangona ka kitea te wairua o ako! Tahu Paki @TahuPaki
Mahitahi ● ● ● ●
Kōtahitanga Manaakitanga Whakaute Hūmarie
Koinā, mā ngēnei uara, mā ngēnei wāriu ka tōtika te tangata! Aroha atu aroha mai, koha atu koha mai! Mā ngēnei uara ka māmā ake te tūhonohono atu ki tangata kē! Ko te wairua o te tangata Te tomokanga ki te atua I rongo au i tēnei kīanga i tētehi waiata nā te rōpū haka o Te Mana o Māreikura. He kōrero tēnei e whakaahua ana i tētehi hononga o te tangata ki te ao wairua. Ki tō te Māori titiro, he taha wairua tō te tangata. E ai ki a Mason Durie i āna rangahau he taha wairua tō te tangata ko tana hononga ki a ngā matua tipuna, ki te whenua, ki te ao wairua. Ko tona waiaro, ko tona hauora, ko tona mauri! Me kaha ngā taha e whā o te tangata, tona taha tinana, tona taha whanau me tona taha hinengaro. Ki te whati te wairua o te tangata ka hinga! Ki te whakanui te wairua o te tangata ka ora! Nō reira, me whakapono te tangata ki a ia anō ki āna pukenga, ki āna akoranga! Kia hari kia koa kia tau te rongomau ki te mata o te whenua!
Tahu Paki @TahuPaki
He mihi aroha He kupu whakakōpani tāku mō te kaupapa nui whakaharahara nei o Connected Educator Month - He whatunga tāngata he whatunga mātanga! Nanakia tonu! Nei te owha nei te whakamānawa atu ki ngā ihu manea mō koutou i whakapau kaha ki te matapaki kaupapa mātauranga nei au ka mihi! E te ringa toi e te ringa auaha e Pam Hook nei rā te mihi! He toki koe! E mihi ana ki te Tākuta Wendy Kofoed mō āna kōrero mō te ao ako i te rautau e tū mai nei. Taputapu kē! E rere ana ngā mihi ki a koe e te hoa nō Mokoia e Annemarie Hyde mō ngā kōrero hāngai ana ki ngā whare wānanga (MLE). Kino kē! He mihi kau ki a koe e whaea e Monika Kern mō o kupu e pā ana ki te haumarutanga īpae. Ka mau te wehi!
Tahu Paki @TahuPaki
Kei ngā taniwha hikuroa o te ao Tīhau e te tuakana @mrkempnz, Craig Kemp nei te tūohu atu ki a koe. Tīhau atu tīhau mai! Kāore e ārikarika ngā mihi ki te hoa e Philippa Nicoll Antipas mō o kupu hāngai ki ngā ariā ako. Tō koi hoki! Kei te ringa hangarau e te ringa tutu e Richard Wells mokori anō kia rere a mihi ki koe mō ngā kupu kua karawhiua mai! Meinga meinga! Kei te ringa whatu, kei te ringa whiti, tātai ki runga tātai ki raro e te wāhine kaha e Karen e mīharo ana au ki a koe me o mahi katoa! Ko koe titoko o te iwi! Kāti, e te ihuoneone e Sonya mōu i whakaporo riaka mōu i whakapau kaha ki te whakakaokao i ngā whakaaro me ngā tuhia, e kore e mutu ngā mihi! Ūana te wehi!
Tahu Paki @TahuPaki
Add your thoughts to the blog posts below because we are looking for critical feedback. Hook, P. (2014, October 21). Take away the descriptors - Artichoke. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://artichoke.typepad.com/artichoke/2014/10/take-away-the-descriptors.html Hyde, A. (2014, October 2). (Modern) Learning Environments. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://likeahoginmud.blogspot.co.nz/2014/10/modern-learning-environments.html Kemp, C. (2014, October 30). Taking away the descriptor â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Collaboration. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://mrkempnz.com/2014/10/taking-away-the-descriptor-collaboration.html Kern, M. (2014, October 21). Are we Digital Citizens, or rather Citizens in an increasingly Digital World? Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://thebelbird.blogspot.co.nz/2014/10/are-we-digital-citizens-or-rather.html Kofoed, W. (2014, October 18). E-ducators, itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s about a learner mind-set. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://drwendykofoed.com/2014/10/e-ducators-its-about-a-learner-mind-set Melhuish Spencer, K. (2014, October 28). The death of the digital community? Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://karenmelhuishspencer.com/2014/10/28/the-death-of-the-digital-community/ N Antipas, P. (2014, October 17). Redundant Adjectives. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://eodysseyblog.wordpress.com/2014/10/17/redundant-adjectives/ Paki, T. (2014, October 22). Whanaungatanga Collaborative E-Book Connected Educator Month 2014. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://teaomataurangatokutirohangaake.blogspot.co.nz/2014/10/whanaungatanga-collaborative-e-book.html Van Schaijik, S. (2014, October 30) Can I see you, teacher? Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://svanschaijik.blogspot.co.nz/2014/10/can-i-see-you-teacher.html Wells, R. (2014, October 18). An End to "21st Century" Learning Tools. Retrieved October 30, 2014, from http://ipad4schools.org/2014/10/18/an-end-to-21st-century-learning-tools/
Acknowledgement #CENZ14 Disruptive Friends: Andrew Cowie (Citizenship) Kathy Scott (Pedagogy) Bridget Casse (Educator/ learner) Laura Hill (Collaboration) Rachel Roberts (Communities) Beth Holland (Tools)