A quick google search finds Bernard Percy writing about reaching the tipping point for the spread educational technology — and what we need to do to get there. (Interesting, he cities a new book by Mark Gura, an old fellow traveller from the days of the NYC Board of Education… I’m so often struck by how small the world really is.)
But David Warlick expresses some concern about the nature of the spreading virus of educational technology. He writes:
Its the words. They seem not to be sufficient any more for what I feel needs to be happening in our classrooms.
– Teaching: Its too active. It places too much of the responsibility and focus on the figure who isnt going to be around when the student leaves the classroom but continues to need to learn.
– Learning: Its too passive and final. Ive learned this, this part is over, lets go to the next part. Nothings over any more.
– Technology: Its only the tool, the conduit, the pen and paper. Its the color we paint the walls. Its the windows, the door, and the motors we dont see. But not much more.
Certainly, Gladwell would agree that we have to be very careful the viruses (and really, I prefer ‘memes’) that spread… and if we are to look to change the conversation, I think Gladwell would agree that we have to think hard about the way we proceed. As David writes:
Its a new conversation between students and teachers, and it goes both ways. Its new conversations between students, conversations between students and experts, conversations between classrooms and homes, and conversations between schools and their communities. Its a national and international conversation about what and how children need to be learning and ongoing conversations about solving new problems answering new questions and accomplishing new goals.
I’d argue that David hits the Gladwell trifecta — he’s a Maven, Salesman and Connector wrapped into one, so the fact that he’s out there having these conversations, writing the tools he creates and putting people together will go a long way toward ensuring the message spreads in a positive way. I hope that SLA can do its part by providing a model of new literacy and new schools with the way we use these new tools. But, and this is David’s constant refrain, how do we get people to talk about the new way we learn, with the tools as a piece of the puzzle, rather than talking about the tools first.
Can we "tip" the conversation so that the tail stops wagging the dog?