Procurement Issues – NYC Department of Education CIO Departs, Will Focus on Procurement Issues
Procurement Issues -Hal Friedlander helped the Education Department support classroom technology, and plans to start a nonprofit organization that will tackle a major problem facing his field.
Procurement Issues – BY TANYA ROSCORLA / JANUARY 22, 20160
Procurement Issues -If you look at the way schools engage technology you easily can understand why they accomplish nothing specific to their real goal in implementing technology: Advancing sustained, student success outcomes, for all students, resulting in sustained advanced individual student performance improvement outcomes, leading to success in college and/or being a successful, sustained, contributor to society..
Lots and lots of traditional education institutions and traditional educators are institution focused. This means they have paradigm paralysis and choose maintain the traditional one size fits all teaching staus quo, really at all costs to their defined objective, above (advancing student success for all students) What happens, then, is technology is something that delivers the incumbent one size fits all teaching model faster…the device then becomes king (tablet, whiteboard, one size fits all elearning), money is spent, time is wasted, results are dismal, conversations are held, but one size fits all teaching prevails.
No one seems to embrace education’s mandated adaptive learning element beyond simply being subject matter expert and one size fits all teaching.
No one learns from the Chicago school systems experience of adding simple devices to deliver one size fits all teaching and after a year finding out that one size fits all teaching was delivered to individual, faster, BUT no additional relevant learning occurred.
Obviously LAUSD didn’t have a strategic clue, as to why they wanted ipads for each and every student. They incorrectly focused on the device. Needless to say, Chicago’s experience didn’t seen to matter to them, they thought they could get a different outcome from the same approach.
Okay, what should they be doing?
First and foremost they need to align their efforts (paradigm change) with their end strategic goal, their mission/vision for existing..student success outcomes.
Then they need to research what it takes to achieve that objective. The information is out there and easily accessed.
Then they need to organizationally implement, change management methodology to align to their reason for existing, advancing student success outcomes.
In a nutshell, the research is clear that student centered, blended and flipped classrooms, supplemented by educationally innovative software, that seamlessly integrates relevant and appropriate pedagogy, delivered to individual student over simple devices that are able to run software, with individual student, professional ongoing facilitation is what works.
How does this compare to traditional educations one size fits all lectures, videos, pdf. files, word docs, et.al., delivered to students on devices?
Traditional educators want to maintain the one size fits all paradigm, so badly, that they offered us a revolution in ‘learning’ through one size fits all MOOC’s. They knew better, but they threw this out there with dismal success, relative to the real objective, advanced student success outcomes. What a colossal waste of time, money, effort and student adaptive learning opportunity cost, from those ‘experts’ in learning
Being a subject matter expert, puking information , in a one size fits all methodology, is efficient for the instructor, but ineffective and inefficient for the students..that’s why students struggle and have very little to offer after graduation. The current one size fits all methodology does not empower students with successful outcomes.
Educators MUST become experts in how individuals learn (pedagogy) and they must become experts in education reform.
Then they can focus on student centered methodologies that empower students with success and successful outcomes.
Traditional educators do lots and lots of talking about student centered success, lots of hand wringing, lots of naysaying, but very little, if any positive behavior towards changing what they do to empower students with successful outcomes. They are too busy to change, and they apparently don’t make enough money, so those items become their primary focus. Oh by the buy they are also under appreciated for their efforts.
Most of what happens in traditional education is smoke and mirror activity, to delay positive paradigm change, that directly benefits students and their success. Remember the hoopla on how one size fits all MOOCs were going to revolutionize individual adaptive learning? How about educational organizations that are replacing one size fits all lectures, with one size fits all elearning, neither of which works for the students, but they promote the change as a benefit to the student, when it’s no student benefit at all.
In publicly funded institutions, where is the accountability for this? Would we let our pilots risk our safety, because a flawed methodology works for them and they had no desire to change it for the benefit of their passengers? How about our nurses and physicians? What if they didn’t evolve beyond 20th century medicine? Would we be okay with that? Why is it that these professionals are accountable for their actions and in actions, but traditional educators aggressively resist being accountable?
In professions, individuals evolve, understand, embrace and implement innovations that benefit their passengers and patients.
Traditional educators resist change to the detriment of their students and the funding public at large.
Positive change must occur. Traditional educators are public servants tasked with empowering our students with success. Their current results are unacceptable, but they continue to resist positive change. Go figure.
If we are to treat them as professionals they collectively must act like professionals and embrace positive change. Unless they do, our students will suffer, which is unacceptable and unsustainable.
The New York City IT staff now supports classroom technology from inside the Department of Education.DAVID KIDD
The top IT leader for the New York City Department of Education will finish out his last week on the job in January as he prepares to tackle the big problem of procurement in K-12 education.
Hal Friedlander started his job as chief information officer about three years ago and helped lead a major shift in how IT supported schools. At the time, the IT department spent most of their efforts on providing bandwidth, keeping the network running and handling student information systems, along with other infrastructure responsibilities. They didn’t touch classroom technology at all and left that up to individual schools.
Under Friedlander’s leadership, the IT and legal teams worked out a memorandum of understanding two years ago with Google Apps for Education, which represented their first foray into supporting classroom technology. The custom privacy agreement gave the city’s official seal of approval for schools to use the service and secured privacy protections in writing, including an acknowledgment that Google does meet FERPA privacy standards and doesn’t use data for purposes other than supporting students’ work.
This type of language is now in the company’s standard agreements with schools, in part because of the work done by the department’s IT and legal teams. And use of the service has quadrupled in New York City schools since the department signed the memorandum.
Procurement Issues -Read the Rest of the Article, Here
To Discuss how these Solutions will add value for you, your organization and/or your clients, Affinity/Resale Opportunities, and/or Collaborative Efforts, Please Contact:
Tom McDonald, email@example.com; 608-788-5144; Skype: tsmw5752