“Don’t walk behind me, I may not lead. Don’t walk in front of me, I may not follow. Just walk beside me and be my friend.”

Albert Camus

Is it too early to start seeing a payoff for the investment in the 1-to-1 MTLI? Perhaps. But I’m sensing that huge transformations are about to take place. Nope, I don’t have a shred of scientific evidence, only an ear to the ground in the various schools I visit. I tell you, this old digital immigrant can feel the vibrations. A take-off point is about to occur!

The most significant indication is that we all now know that it ain’t going away. I am hearing from even the most skeptical educators now that they’re getting on board. There is no question in our minds that the train has left the station, is slowly picking up speed, is not going to reverse direction, and that we’d better run fast to catch up and jump aboard.

Many of us who have had many years in education have seen more than our share of bandwagons in which everyone gets swept up in the enthusiam, only to see a swing of the pendulum, with everyone then running in the opposite direction.

This is different. This is deep. This is revolutionary. This is a time to find our colleagues where they are and gently bring them along.

Our major issues now are ethical. How are we to treat one another? What is important?

As the new school year rapidly approaches, I want to ask something I usually begin my workshops with. Do you know where the layout of your QWERTY keyboard came from?

No? Well, the placement of letters comes from a time when people could type faster than their typewriters could keep up. Keys would get jammed in a terrific mess of metal and ink. By placing frequently used keys, like vowels, in harder to reach places, users were slowed down.

Now, examine keyboard in front of you.

The placement of the keys has been the same since 1873. There are newer, redesigned keyboards that allow faster typing such as the Dvorak keyboard. Introduced in 1936 it arranges the keys for the greatest efficiency. But, overwhelmingly we use what is given to us.
What we have always known and are comfortable with.

Sound familiar?

Many teach how they were taught, and I won’t belabor the point, but the world is different. It’s flat right?

If I handed you a new keyboard, it would undoubtedly take time to unlearn how you type and relearn the new positions. During that time, productivity would down and frustration would ensue. Yet, with the understanding that ultimately, speed and accuracy will improve with time and practice until you have surpassed what you were capable of before.

Such is all new learning.
Don’t let only what you’re comfortable with limit where you can go!

I think educational leaders should approach rapid change from the inner strength that comes from their “universal bones.” For instance, those who think change should drive a new understanding of ethics or democracy should instead, let their understanding of ethics and democracy drive their approach to new technologies. I can think of no better example than the confrontation between Elliot Schrage, of Google, and a group of congressmen over his defense of Google’s practice of helping China to oppress its people. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/15/eveningnews/main1321785.shtml
Schrage is a “Corporate ethicist,” a lawyer and consultant with a huge resume (and real achievements) on issues where human rights and global commerce meet. With a very agile mind, he attempts to defend Google’s actions as working toward the greater good in a complex world. The congressmen had a simpler understanding, and typically expressed outrage at what Google was doing. They were informed not by the “new technological landscape,” but by their own sense of democracy and right and wrong. I am saying they were right, and Schrage, in this case, was wrong. No matter what the “greater good,” it was wrong to participate in oppressing China’s people. Period. I think as teachers we are stronger when we rely on an armature of truths about democracy, morality, human rights, etc., and I am not comfortable with the relativism so many seem to be expressing. Rapid technological change is here, yes. It needs educational leaders with backbone and purpose!

Change. Is there anyone who will deny that it is becoming exponential? I’ve lifted this topic from Jim Moulton’s Edutopia Spiral Notebook Post with a new twist because I find it so intriguing. Vernor Venge has spoken of the Singularity, a time in the not too distance future when all bets are off, where there is a take-off point that changes everything. Ray Kurzweil has a site where he gathers information on the implications of the change that is taking place.

Some questions:

How well do you / we adapt to change?
Are we thinking about the implications?
Do we even have any control of how it plays out?
What would your preferred future be?
Who will the winners and losers be?
What is important?

A number of years ago I did a simple graveside service for an older fellow named Steve (not related, age 87) who I was looking after. In writing the eulogy, it occurred to me just how much change he had been through in his lifetime. He grew up in a small farming valley north of Rumford. Reading through his grandfather’s diaries, it struck me how much of his early life had been similar to generations before him. Travel even short distances was quite infrequent and there was a close connection to agriculture. No electricity, no indoor plumbing, no phone. And yet as he reached and went through adulthood he saw industrialization in the form of the huge paper mill built at Rumford, experienced the coming of what we consider essentials today. He experienced the transformation of the landscape and culture by automobiles, radio, television, and on and on.

My question then was this: How did he maintain his sanity with such rapid change? Salvador Dali’s art suddenly had some meaning to me.

But, in hindsight, that change in his life was relatively small compared to what futurist say is coming. Are we ready for it?