Yes

I'll post this in full because it's so right. From one of the best blogs about education I read.

Here is one of my private assumptions about education innovation that could use some public criticism:

If [x] is going to change teaching practice at scale, then [x] needs to be easy, fun, and free for both the teacher and her students. [x] needs to be all three of those things at the same time.
Realize that if you're a teacher and you're reading a blog post, you're automatically seeded in the top 10% of innovative educators. You'll try anything once. Let's also go with Jack Welch and assume that 10% of educators are hopelessly and/or willfully incompetent.

Convince yourself, then, that 80% of teachers exist on a sliding scale of innovation and are basically up for grabs. Those who don't want to try [x] aren't necessarily bad educators. They may have made a rational calculation that [x] isn't easy enough, fun enough, or free enough to adopt.

There are implications here, some obvious, some subtle:

"Good" doesn't matter. This is a little sad. But most of those 80% already have [y], which they consider "good enough." They won't pick up [x], however superior it is to [y], unless it is easier or more fun. This puts the burden on the reformer to make something easy, fun, and free that is also good. Good is the Trojan horse of education innovation.

You'll have to package [x] for Internet distribution. Because it's the only way to distribute at scale for (nearly) free.

Learning should always be fun, though I'm not talking about "fun" as it exists in "unlimited rides and deep-fried Oreos at Six Flags." Rather I'm talking about the profound sense of satisfaction and accomplishment inherent to good learning. Just to be clear.

Learning isn't always easy but learning tools should be. Just for instance, last week, I saw groups of students clicking the same download link over and over again in Safari not realizing that they had already downloaded the attachment. The download window was open but obscured by the browser. Anecdotes like this make me skeptical of Scott McLeod's argument that computers are to teachers what checkout registers are to grocers. Many of you have vastly overrated the ease of educational computing.

The field of easy, fun, and free innovations that are also good for students isn't exactly crowded but, for the record, I have bet on two horses. I expect these picks to strike certain readers as simultaneously naive, deranged, or self-obsessed but these innovations, more than any other I've used or observed, are ones that sell themselves:
Google Reader.
What Can You Do With This.

No further comment

Repeat in full

I've just got back from a great night about teaching....I'll make comment in the morning. Here's someone else saying something I agree with:

Who is this man saying that Angela Gordon's primary concern should have been her children? Who is saying how dreadful it is that only manslaughter was the verdict when it should have been murder? Who is saying that because Social Services never carried out an investigation, Khyra is now dead? Who is this man claiming that the Local Authority was irresponsible?

Khyra's father.

And what of HIS responsibility? What of his role as her father? She was starved for MONTHS! Where on earth was HE? He didn't even know that his ex-wife was living (as was his daughter) with a man who he knew from his mosque! Incidentally, this man used to beat poor little Khyra with a stick and pour cold water over her when she searched for food.

So where was her father when all of this was happening? Where was he when his child was literally dying?

ABROAD!!

He had to fly home when he discovered she was dead!

And he dares to take the moral high ground and criticise the perfect strangers who took more interest in his child (by being in the country and visiting the house) than he did himself?

Don't get me wrong: clearly Social Services did not fulfil their duties. Clearly there is much wrongdoing in this story from various parties. And Khyra's father does admit to having 'failed' her. But when one overlooks one's child so fundamentally as to fail to keep them alive, does this not humble one to a position where one would not dare be critical of others? Apparently not. Not in sense-of-entitlement, 21st-century Britain anyway.

The man is scum. Mr Delroy Frances, oops, I mean Mr Ishaq Abu Zaire. No doubt a bored, useless, waste-of-space 2nd generation Caribbean twit who found salvation in converting to Islam. Too bad the great prophet Mohammed was unable to teach him the importance of family, personal responsibility and love of one's children.

Delroy Frances brought a child into this world and left her to a madwoman, expecting an unknown governmental body to protect and raise his child while he went gallivanting around the world. Does the media question him? No. Does the judge ask 'But where was her father in all of this?' No. All anyone has to say is that Social Services is at fault - which they are of course - in part. But what baffles me is how people don't instinctively know that first and foremost, a child is her parents' responsibility and all of us who are charged with the upbringing of children should not shirk that responsibility, however many 'state services' claim that they can do a better job than we can, at raising them. The most important people in a child's life are, after all, her parents.

Isn't that obvious?

May the lovely little Khyra Ishaq who lived such a short and very sad life, finally rest in peace.

* Actually I rereading this. I got back really quite drunk and now think this is self evident, preaching and a bit dull. I'm new to this blogging stuff....must not post while drunk. Still need to say what happened.