Select Page

One time, in the middle of an ed -tech camp, I heard a colleague mention that 18th and 19th-century learners probably thought their skills were modern as well. The presenter had just huffed through a detailed pitch for a new app that could potentially revolutionize learning to the nth degree. My colleague, ever the skeptic and always the smart ass was doubtful, to say the least. But his point was entirely en pointe.

I heard a colleague mention that 18th and 19th-century learners probably thought their skills were modern as well.

My school board is in the midst of a reformation where all the ‘new’ is tagged as 21st century and or modern learning. And much of what gets perceived as ‘new’ is wrapped in an app, device, or tech tool. I won’t debate whether the ed-tech is a refresh or rewire on teaching [or both, sometimes], but  I can admit from the inside that I am officially suffering through ed-tech-fatigue. I have played with ed-tech for some time now – early adopting, getting messy, and supporting others explorations. And all of this ed-tech sandboxing has lead me into two stark realities.

  • I am officially tired of tech-driven edu-conversations.
  • I am officially invigorated by hunting down the signals of change in edu.

I won’t debate whether the ed-tech is a refresh or rewire on teaching [or both, sometimes], but  I can admit from the inside that I am officially suffering through ed-tech-fatigue.

The buzz that I have begun to tune into is coming from places where tech may or may not be accelerating the learning and the most modern element is around conceptual frameworks, like change, and equity, and learning and integration.

What if the silos opened outward?

But, before I settle into the breakdown of these ‘old school’ elements. I gotta take some time to figure the nature of these signals. What is the point, in understanding the point of origin? And why am I noticing them now?