Reading Writing Responding

Via  @hhoede  on  Twitter  I remember late last year discussing ICT with a guy I know who loves technology and he suggested to me that you need a complete vision for technology in school. Don't say, 'I wan't iPad's in Early Years or laptops in Secondary', you need to have in mind a complete vision as to what a 21st century classroom looks like, for students, for teachers, for parents, for administration, for everyone. I understood what he was saying, that when it comes to 21st century learning, it is important to have a narrative, a story to tell, a painting to show in order to provide the reason and purpose behind the call for change. The problem is that a part of me felt that every time I started imagining such a reality it simply collapsed in heap. All I could see were the road blocks, the hurdles to be jumped. For as I spoke about in my post on excuses , we so often worry about what is not possible and start there. Instead, I have decided that I...

Johanna O'Farrell started it. She wrote an article for The Age titled ' Splashing Cash won't Fix Australia's Broken Education System '. The piece was basically a tirade against 21st century learning from the point of view of a secondary teacher. There have already been a few responses written including  +Mel Cashen 's ' Why our schools are NOT failing your children ' and +Celia Coffa 's ' Why Our Schools Are Not Failing Your Children - Another Teacher Tells '. Both of which shared their passion about why schools are not failing. Leaving the hyperbole and exclusive language aside, I would like to add my own response by unpacking a few of O'Farrell's arguments a bit further. Reading ... Books? O'Farrell states: Instead, the strategy is that children will simply learn to read and write ''by osmosis''. This is all well and good for children from families where reading is habitual. However, those from househo...