Sarah Giersch of NSDL Core Integration attended this meeting with Andrew Walker and Deonne Johnson of Utah State University. We represented Digital Libraries go to School (DLgtS), a three-year project which was funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF) in 2006 (ESI #0554440) to develop a professional development workshop curriculum that enables in- and pre-service teachers to design their own learning activities for classrooms using online resources from NSDL and the Web. This project builds on work previously funded by NSF,such as the National Science Digital Library and the Instructional Architect (IA), which was developed at Utah State University.

In its ongoing realignment of programs to institutional mission, NSF has merged two programs, Instructional Materials Development (IMD) and Teacher Professional Continuum (TPC), into a new program called Discovery Research K-12 (DR-K12). There were about 300 PIs at the meeting from the two defunct programs and the new one. DR-K12 is itself part of the new Division of Research on Learning in Formal and Informal Settings (DRL). Four programs now comprise DRL: DR-K12, REESE, ITEST, and ISE.

The meeting format included plenary presentations during mealtimes, two poster sessions that ended at 9 and 10pm, and concurrent breakouts where projects reported on their work with very little discussion. To further facilitate networking there were 15-minute breaks and a binder containing copies of every project’s abstract from the NSF awards database. Ivan Denisovich would have been challenged to derive any satisfaction from the conference chicken — accompanied by iceberg lettuce, two cucumber slices, and a grape tomato — at every meal.

At last year’s TPC program meeting, DLgtS was the odd project because we were doing professional development (PD) using online tools and resources, but at least most projects were conducting some type of PD or related outreach. This year we slipped a caste to untouchable because we were training teachers to create their own materials (gasp) using online tools and resources. Most attendees were into hardcore curriculum development with rigorous, experimentally designed assessments. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. However, their, how shall I say, attitude, and the nature of the projects, was quite unrelated to the plenary presentations (described below), which emphasized taking advantage of technology to help deliver, evaluate and innovatively transform education.

Joan Ferrini-Mundy, DRL Director, provided a good overview of recent high-level reports, highlighting the importance of STEM funding and education research. She emphasized that NSF also does education research, in addition to creating materials, and challenged the audience to think of ways to demonstrate that “education” research is part of NSF’s core value. She also challenged attendees to think about problems 5 or 10 years out that will affect STEM teaching and learning and write proposals addressing those problems now. The words she used were “transformative research” in relation to innovation. The other topic of her presentation addressed the “climate of accountability,” and asked that projects conducting experimental, or quasi-experimental, evaluation contact NSF for design assistance. She also mentioned that NSF is considering how to more formally help projects with evaluation design and methodology. My interpretation is that NSF continues to position itself in relation to the Department of Education in response to the atmosphere that generated NCLB.

Monica Martinez of the KnowledgeWorks Foundation presented the Map of Future Forces Affecting Education, which was prepared by the Institute for the Future. “The map is a forecast of plausible trends and cultural shifts that are happening and/or will probably occur over the next 10 years,” she said. The map was developed as a high-level overview to catalyze conversations, though not at this conference. in the map, the six Drivers of Change for 2006-2016 are:

* Grassroots Economics: from economies of scale to economies of groups;
* Smart Networking: from informed citizens to engaged networkers;
* Strong Opinions, Strongly Held: from a global media culture to a splintered fundamentalism;
* Sick Herd: from steadily improving quality of life to increasing signs of distress;
* Urban Wilderness: from predominantly rural to a predominantly urban spaces; and,
* The End of Cyberspace: from physical versus digital to seamlessly physical and digital.

These were presented as rows in a matrix and the columns consisted of Family & Community, Markets, Institutions, Educators & Learning, and Tools & Practices. Thinking how Sick Herd factors could affect how education is delivered was sobering.

Keith Sawyer of Washington University, St. Louis, talked about creativity in relation to the global innovation society. His demonstration stories involved talking about how games were developed, one of which was Monopoly. Called The Landlord’s Game, it was developed by the Quakers in the late 1880’s to demonstrate the evils of capitalism and the benefits of the flat tax. It spread through Quaker communities and was modified by each group until it came to the attention of Charles Darrow, who had Quaker friends who taught him the game. Darrow modified some of the rules, called it Monopoly, and sold it to Parker Bros. as his own creation in 1936. The Quakers sued Parker Bros. in the late sixties and eventually won. Lesson: the myth of the lone inventor is just that. Mad props to the attendee who used the phrase “Calvinist morals” in a follow-up question. (Note: I’m just recording the story, as told over atrocious French rolls and pressed meat sandwiches (conference chicken?). The Internet is chock full of nuances on this narrative and counter claims.)

We divided, but were conquered, by the breakout sessions. Determined to use some of our time productively, we skipped the last set of afternoon breakouts and had a project meeting. Giddy with success and starving, we skipped yet another opportunity for conference chicken a la secret sauce and went to The New Big Wong in Chinatown. Three early bird specials (seafood, beef, and tofu) later, we were refreshed enough to return to our poster. The most exciting moment was when we captured a fifth grade teacher and grilled him on our review rubric for online resources. We let him go, with lots of handouts, and retreated for the evening.

The morning plenary wasn’t memorable, and starving again, we went for gyros and kabobs (beef and lamb) at Union Station before heading home. But before I sign off, here’s one Additional Charming Anecdote: At the first meal, the first person I met asked me this first question: Does NSDL use “open source,” and isn’t that subversive?

–Written by Sarah Giersch. Any opinions or conclusions are entirely her own and do not represent those of NSDL, Utah State University, or the National Science Foundation.