Saturday, July 20, 2013
Wednesday, June 12, 2013
The Future Project - iMind: Our evolving mind
Professor Ian Hickie Executive Director of the Brain and Mind Research Institute and Associate Professor Jane Burns from the Young and Well Cooperative Research Centre spoke about the adolescent brain and the impacts of technology and social media on the brain.
The introduction asked one main question, is the teenage attraction to social media, alcohol and sleep deprivation bad for the brain?
The night was split into a section for presentation and then Q and A. Professor Hickie was first. He outlined the new thinking of neuroplasticity that shows that the brain is able to grow and change and learn throughout our lives. However he points out that the majority of connections are made in childhood. As a constant learner I was slightly upset to hear this (slightly obvious) news because I think I don't have enough time left to learn everything I want to learn and I wish I had some wasted adolescence left.
He then showed data on the tops 20 mental health issues for teens, both girls and boys and of these three categories are very highly represented. They are anxiety (number 1 for girls), psychotic disorders (higher for boys) and substance abuse.
I loved that Professor Hickie came with a positive message on technology. He sees the possibilities of technology in addressing teen positive mental health. He sees technology as an important medium for reaching teens because that's where they are but also for overcoming some of the isolation associated with being a teenager and feeling misunderstood. He addressed some of the concerns on gaming but feels that isolated gaming is far more worrying than social gaming because there are positive mental health stimuli coming from social gaming.
He pointed out that of the three dangers for teens raised in the introduction overuse of alcohol and sleep deprivation are far more dangerous for mental health than social media. He showed that binge drinking has a negative effect on the brain even over short periods of time, not necessarily after extended periods of overuse of alcohol. He also showed that sleep deprivation was very detrimental to learning. To all of our HSC students staying up all night before an exam to study, according to Professor Ian Hickie you might as well not have studied at all for all the good the all-nighter did you. Our brains need sleep to process information. As someone who only got through university three times by staying up all night to finish assignments, I stand by the fact that it you don't have to recall anything, the all-nighter has its place (I am willing to conceded, however, that planning life so that the assignment is complete before the due date might be marginally better but in my case so far unachievable).
Associate Professor Jane Burns showed us some data hot off the Young and Well presses. There is a new species called Technosapien. They released the results of their survey of 16 -25 year olds and showed the following info-graphic:
The thing that Jane drew our attention to was the fact that young people don't make a distinction between socialising online and offline but that it's just socialising. She also said that some of the common myths, such as that online gambling is rife amongst young Australians, is simply not true. Only 6% of young people apparently gamble online. She said that the power of technology comes from what it allows students to do. She used the example of her own son who has special needs and his ability to communicate through an iPad. The only concern she raised from the data is that it seems that too many young people are using technology after 11PM and that that contradicts the recommendations for brain performance.
The best thing that came out of the night was the agreement between the two experts that we should stop telling teens what we define as use and overuse. We should sit down with the kids themselves to determine the rules for what is reasonable in a given situation rather than imposing draconian, top-down guidelines on them. Especially as the teens probably know, more than the people trying to impose the rules, exactly how to bypass them.
My key take away was Jane's wrap-up comment "Technology is not to e feared and ignorance breeds fear".
I'm thinking our parents need to know some of this stuff, now how to get the information to them...
The night was well compered by Matthew Jacob.
Monday, May 6, 2013
TedxSydney 2013 - Mind = Blown
![]() |
| Thanks to TEDxSydney for the use of their image. Mine didn't turn out like this. |
Saturday, June 4, 2011
TEDx Sydney 2011 - Mind Awakening

This year through a process of application and a huge dollop of good luck I was invited to be a delegate at the TEDX Sydney Conference. It was held on 28th May 2011 at Carriage Works in Redfern and it was like a jolt of electricty to the brain. I, like Frankenstein's monster, felt brought to life. (Sorry Mary Shelley)
TEDx is the TED franchise which means that other countries can use the TED format from the US in their location. From the TED website "Each year, the world's leading thinkers and doers gather in for an event many describe as the highlight of their year." This was TEDx Sydney so it had a definite Sydney flavour.
The conference was kicked off with the best, most accessible welcome to country I've ever heard. Usually, this part of an official day is ignored as being an uninspiring necessity. I only raise it this time because it was remarkable in its depth and I felt part of the sense of place. Thanks to Michael West (http://www.guwaali.com.au ) for this experience.
Tjupurru was the opening act and was amazing in his redefinition of the one-man-band using technology and the didgeribone to create astounding hip-hop flavoured music (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MfV8fo0dDo&feature=related ). I will list the other musical performances in the schedule and will link to some of their work but will leave the review to those who have some training in music appreciation, I have the appreciation without the training.
The schedule for the day looked like this...
| SESSION 1 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 8:45AM to 10:30AM | ||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
| SESSION 2 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 11:00AM to 12:30PM | ||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
| SESSION 3 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 2:00PM to 3:30PM | ||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||
| SESSION 4 | ||||||||||||||||||
| 4:30PM to 6:30PM | ||||||||||||||||||
|
After researching and writing that schedule I've realised that I can't possibly do all of those people justice so I'll link to most of their work and provide a summary for my favourites which tend to be the ones that relate most to the theme of this blog anyway. These were Genevieve Bell, Saul Griffiths, Drew Berry and Richard Gill.
Richard Gill (http://www.smh.com.au/news/entertainment/arts/the-young-persons-guide-to-the-orchestra-8230-is-lacking/2009/09/01/1251570708614.html) is a composer and music educator who you might know from his contributions to ABC's "Spicks and Specks" program (well that's where I first heard of him). Richard spoke of the need for performing arts in the education of young children and especially music (he happily identified his own bias) "Every child should have access to properly taught music in the hands of a properly taught teacher." He talked of the instinctual way in which humans communicate through music and how children should be able to have time to create their own sound and music through song long before they have the discipline to learn music in a structural way. "Music does not describe, narrate or tell stories. Music evokes, suggests and implies and opens up the mind of a child in an extraordinary way."
The thing that most struck me was his finishing point which was that having a teenage child come to you with a composition who says "Look, I made this myself!" with the tone that dares you to find fault with it was the best thing in the world. I think that he needs to realise that that is the joy of all teaching and what we should be designing our educational system and especially our teaching programs to attain, regardless the subject matter.
Genevieve Bell (http://www.heraldsun.com.au/technology/switched-on-world-is-killing-creativity-expert-warns/story-fn7celvh-1226064491905 ) is a corporate anthropologist (seriously, this is a job!). She was talking about our need to switch off from the constant demands of the internet and be bored. Her theory is that boredom is more than just resting or doing something fun and for one's self. She spoke of Heidegger revelling in being stuck at a train station for four hours (http://www.stephenhicks.org/tag/heidegger-on-boredom/ ). It appears that boredom - the state of disengagement - allows the brain to meander in a way that simple rest does not. Genevieve believes that our device-driven world is designed to completely avoid boredom. This is not a good thing for the growth of ideas and creativity.
I find it hard to hold the juxtaposition of Genevieve telling us we need to be bored and working at intel whose business revolves around us buying those devices but I think she works to represent the wants and needs of regular people to the intel corporation.
Here's her on the future of the internet… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAcooO23OaY
I think her ideas on having time for switching off are really applicable in the world of technology in education. We need to allow the students space to let their minds wander and really tap into their creativity and let their mind have new ideas and make new connections. It's a lovely circular idea that we have to allow the kids to become disengaged in order to foster their future engagement.
Drew Berry is a legend. He appears to have cut out an unique role in science. He takes unobservable things like the replication of DNA and builds complex, elegant, 3d animations of these processes. These are used to educate non-scientists about these amazing procedures. He has managed to create a role for himself which plays to his strengths in science and his interest in graphic design. He's fascinating. I love that it is still possible in this world to do exactly what you want to do. Here is some of his amazing work… http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7wpTJVWra7I
Saul Griffith (http://www.ted.com/talks/saul_griffith_on_everyday_inventions.html ) wants us to make the future awesome again. He's an inventor, TED regular and expert on sustainability. He's currently working on using amazing kites to generate electricity (http://www.ted.com/talks/saul_griffith_on_kites_as_the_future_of_renewable_energy.html )
He spoke about how society's view of the future has changed over time. In the past our view of the future included the Jetsons and their robotic maid and Tintin and his voyage to the moon and undersea adventures (hence the blog image).
In contrast, our current view of the future is dystopian and not a little scary. The world is going to warm, flood, be reduced to war over the remaining energy and water. He considers this change in projected future to be a crisis of human imagination. We need to break the bounds of our negative self-talk and once again find a positive, exciting and awesome vision for the future. Something we can all be excited about working towards.
He reminds us that the most efficient forms of transport are roller-coaster and zip line… what can be more awesome than that?
Now, if only we could find something really boring to do so we could start all these wonderful ideas. One thing's for sure; TEDx wasn't it!
Tuesday, May 10, 2011
The Google Teacher's Academy

In the last week of the holidays (what already feels like months ago) I attended the Google Teachers Academy. I know I've been tardy in writing about it (apologies to my three dedicated readers :-) but I wanted to let the experience mull before I worked out what the value was and how to pass that information along.
The plan for the day (there was a second part day that was an optional unconference but more about that later) was a pyramid scheme for training. Attendees were shown a flythrough of Google Tools at a cracking pace so that we could all go home and investigate further and then redeliver much of this training at a more sedentary pace to our colleagues and community with a view to expanding Google's market. This sounds a little cynical but I'm not. It was a wonderful experience and being a generally busy person it was nice to have the time to explore some of the labs projects and new features that I had on my ToDo list to explore. I also think that unlike in sales (where it's usually considered a scam)a pyramid scheme works really well for training and in a perfect world reaches an extraordinary number of people.
The tools we covered were Google Search (inc books, scholar, news archive and wonder wheel), Google Sites, Blogger, Gmail, Google Docs (and spreadsheets), Google Earth and Maps and the CR48 chrome laptop. We also heard from half a dozen or so teachers about innovative uses for the tools in the classroom. To be honest I agree with Chris Betcher (@betchaboy) in his blog post; I would have preferred more of the innovative ideas and less of the tools stuff. I have reflected as people have asked me again and again what I most took away from the day and for me it seemed to always be the presentations of the other teachers. I find that although I do not know everything about Google Tools I can find out anything I want to know with only the highest overview of what's possible. I think the most valuable part of the Tools training was the link to the GTApps for Ed training site where I can explore at my leisure.
That said I have listed here the coolest things I discovered at the training sessions. You may already know about all of these (I knew about most) but I thought they were cool. (Note: I couldn't link to the stuff from the actual conference but I searched for similar information and have linked to it)
Google sites as intranets and collaborative tools
Google spaces
The spaces in the Googleplex were amazing. The majority of people seemed to still sit at a standard desk with normal chair and work just like the rest of us but then there were meeting rooms with interesting décor and configurations, sleep pods, quiet cubby holes for research, reading rooms, meditation spaces and console gaming equipment too. It gave an interesting insight into what you can do to get the most out of smart, dedicated people. We should be investigating this in our school spaces.
If you didn't already know, Google allows their people 20% of their time to work on a project that interests them. The idea is that you get more out of people overall if you give them time to spend usefully in a way that they want. This aligns with Dan Pink's book Drive (and talk on TED). It's also something I think we should be investigating for students.
At the end of the day we were all asked to go home and think of a project that we could achieve this year involving Google Tools which would allow us to evangelise their use to others. I think that rather than send us away with this task the team could have make this the focus of the day. I met most of the attendees and they were all smart, passionate, techie teachers and if Google had asked us to do some prep work in the form of reading up on tools and their possibilities and then set us the task to come up with a project either in groups or individually with the Lead Learners always floating and available to answer questions on their area of expertise we would have achieved more. We could have bounced ideas off each other and collaborated in a way that is much more difficult when the difficulties of distance and the pressures of the school term begin once again.
Monday, April 11, 2011
Pinch Hitting

From the free dictionary
pinch-hit
intr.v. pinch-hit, pinch-hit·ting, pinch-hits
1. Baseball To bat in place of a player scheduled to bat, especially when a hit is badly needed.
2. Informal To substitute for another in a time of need.
It was pointed out to me the other day that we ICT Integrators are pinch hitters. Since this was a sports reference I looked at him blankly. But after some discussion I came to realise what he meant.
Before you take offence on our behalf, let me introduce you to a model I really like using in ICT Integration. It's called the SAMR model (link to a presentation by Puentedura outlining SAMR). SAMR was developed by Puentedura and stands for Substitution, Augmentation, Modification and Redefinition. It can be used to assess your ICT integration to determine whether you're using technology to modify current styles of teaching or to transform. We have some brilliant transformative projects at our school and I feel privileged to be part of some of them.
Our job as ICT Integrators is to help teachers come up with projects that will use technology in the modification and redefinition levels of the SAMR model. They know their content matter and we know the technology and together we seek excellence in pedagogy. (this is s reference to the TPCK model also in the Puentedura presentation). It takes time, research and thought to come up with a good redefining project.
In a presentation the other day I was reminded of a fabulous excerpt from a speech by Ken Robinson about changing education paradigms…
I love this talk and I agree that we should shift education to be more tailored and purposeful and less standardized. I even trust that a good technology enabled project achieves some of what Ken Robinson is talking about (if only on a micro level).
However, I am not only an ICT integrator. I still teach classes on technology and as such I get a daily reminder of what classes are like around the clock. I introduce technology enabled projects for my own classes but at the same time I have to cover dry syllabus content and have slightly less enthusiastic students who need to be dragged through projects or less able students who need more structure than others and much more scaffolding.
This is the reason that my colleague said that ICT Integrators were pinch hitters. We don't often follow through to the exam, we don't have to mark the work of students who despite all our efforts didn't really "get it". ICT Integrators have magical powers. We do the work, we prepare the resources, we enter the classroom with enthusiasm and we signify to the students that this is not going to be a normal lesson. This means that we see the kids at their best; at their most engaged... and then we walk away.
What can we do about it? I think the only thing we can do is realise that we are pinch hitters. We should run the engaging projects, consult on the uses of technology in the classroom, encourage teachers to shift their teaching practices but realise that the other teachers have to be there all the time, even when they have to deliver the less interesting stuff. We need to not spend our time telling other teachers that if they only used more technology projects that their students would be engaged all of the time. I love my job but even I'm not engaged all the time; sometimes I'm reading what Conan O'Brien (@ConanOBrien) just said on twitter.
Friday, April 1, 2011
Call me Hoges

I don't know how much I communicate with my students.
OK. That was a bit of a setup but the point is, I know how much I talk to them at work when they're sitting in front of me and I know how much we communicate via email and Moodle but what about outside that? I have a twitter account and a smallish blog, I am on the TED ED forum and follow a number of people's blogs and vlogs. I tweet, blog and comment online. How much of this is seen by my students? Maybe none and maybe all.
In the old days there were students and there were teachers. The teachers were up here and the
students were down there. Students called us Marm, Miss and Sir or at the very least Mr and Mrs. The teachers and the students didn't know no care what happened to the other after the bell.
I remember running into a teacher at the shops as a kid and it was a weird, awkward experience. She was still my teacher but they were in trackies and pushing a trolley. She still talked to me as if I was in her classroom and I still called her Mrs.
I know that one of my senior students is on the same TED ED forum as me and I'm not sure what handle she uses. If I get a comment from a student on twitter I don't always know to identify them and they call me @hogesonline. This sets up a weird situation. There is a democratising property to the internet that means that I am not the teacher and they are not the student; we are both subscribers.
Does this mean I should stop tweeting, blogging and commenting in forums. I don't think so. I think it means that I should be careful what I share and unlike Natalie Munro never forget that *anyone* could be reading .
It kind of lends a sense of superficiality to the exchanges with students at school where they still call me Mrs Hogan in the classroom, knowing that they will tweet me a questions to my handle that night. I don't believe that calling me Mrs__________ adds to the students' respect for me. I think as this kind of confusion of roles becomes more prevalent we might come to our senses and stop trying to impose a false autocracy in the classroom. Maybe that makes me "New Age" and I'm sure the eduverse has had this discussion before and often. All I know is I have tweeted to Mark Colvin (@Colvinus) - lead anchor of the AM program on ABC Radio - and got a reply and I couldn't do that in the old world.
Thanks to frankjuarez on Flickr for the use of the image.

