No tech? No problem!

Raise your hand if this happened to you (or in your school) this Spring:
Because of testing, we can't do the unit I planned to do.

Over the past several years, I have developed some pretty tech-heavy units in Springtime that would fall at the "modification" or "redefinition" levels of the SAMR model.  My 5th grade students researched composers, created websites, and interacted on Edmodo.  My 3rd & 4th grade students learned to play recorders while composing on Noteflight.  They composed for each other and learned twice the content.

But this year, we had Badger testing followed immediately by MAP testing in my district.  And although the possibility of devices existed during those 4-6 weeks, I couldn't build a unit around inconsistent schedules.  What to do?

I had recently heard Kasey Bell (shakeuplearning.com) speak at WEMTA about choice boards. So my music colleagues and I set off to redesign an entire 5th grade composer unit with minimum tech, maximum connections, and student voice & choice. Here is our choice board, with an explanation below.

Composer Project Choice Board

 
Take-away for leaders?  We talk about teachers redefining instruction in the presence of technology.  We talk about deliberate, purposeful integration.  But what is the real test of a teacher's changed mindset?  When you take technology away from those same teachers, they may not like it, but they will not go back to the "old" way of teaching the same content.  Once that line has been crossed - once a teacher has chosen to increase engagement, innovation, feedback, and relationships - there is no going back.  They will redesign rather than regress.  It is truly about quality instruction - not the tool.

I would never seriously suggest this, because it would hurt students in the end, but it would be interesting to have a research study that looks at a good 1:1 environment and analyzes what happens when the tech is taken away, or at least returned to intermittent availability.  I will admit that any time I could grab devices in the last few weeks, I did.  But, because of the choice board, it became the student's choice to use the device - not mine.

Choice board explanation:
The core of the project is research skills; thus students needed to do the four boxes on top before moving to the choice board itself.  This got students through the rough draft phase of the project. Once students got to the 4x4 choice board, they needed to pick four choices to make a "bingo".  The rows and columns have been balanced to ensure even variety and effort.  Resist the urge to allow students to pick four random choices - choosing a "bingo" keeps them focused on a goal.  They will gravitate to a favorite and then work outwards from that square.  Each square takes 1-2 music classes. I can tell you that students have been very excited and motivated to work on these projects - at least as motivated as they were in the presence of 1:1 technology.