I have a lot of respect for Steven Schwartz. As Vice-Chancellor of Macquarie University, he has done well to bring Higher Education into the digital era. One area in which he is particularly passionate about is e-books, and their effects in education.

There is plenty of research out there about the effect of e-books in education. In particular, some researchers have claimed that by switching from traditional books to e-books will result in dramatic increases in student grades.

This is all very well and good - in fact, I agree with Steven 110% that ebooks are the way of the future. But I will also add this: "...not just yet."

There are a few fundamental things that have to occur before ebooks really take off, especially in Australia:

1. All students must have access to a compatible device, every class, every day.
This definitely isn't the case, especially in secondary education. The shift from secondary to tertiary education is a daunting experience for most students and we cannot expect first year students to pick up the e-reading skills from the second they step into a university. The shift needs to occur further down the chain, especially in senior secondary.

However, not every school is 1:1 and not every student has access to a device outside of school, anyway. Research from ACER suggests that the figure is closer to 0.9:1 for at-home usage, and slightly less for at-school usage. Some of the barriers include the home environment, and socio-economic issues. Not every student can afford a compatible device, and even then, the home environment isn't always conducive to using one anyway. Especially not in remote Indigenous communities anyway.

2. The price of ebooks must come down.
I have been involved in e-Learning and eBooks since the second I started teaching. I am happy to outlay for a device, but I fail to see the value in purchasing an eBook for the same price as a hard copy. A look at the Inkling store for Business Management books shows most in the $99-$250 price range. Same price range as the hardcopy textbooks. Granted, the books are interactive and can do a lot more than paper textbooks, but the message of value isn't being communicated.

Also, hardcopy books have a recycle value - they can be resold, rebought, passed down, reused. Institutions will baulk at purchasing an eBook license if the cost will outweigh a single purchase that can be recycled for up to 5 years.

3. Availability of ebooks must be improved
Availability of ebook licenses in Australia is atrocious. With publishers such as Random House increasing prices, and other major publishers still refusing licenses in Australia for fear of hurting physical sales, many schools are placing eBooks into the "too hard" basket. This is a shame, but schools are needing to watch their bottom line and ensure that their staff are up to speed on the new technology.

Which brings me to my final point:

4. Not everyone is current with technology
eBooks, digital devices, online content, etc. are all part of a paradigm shift in education in Australia. It saddens me to think that not everyone is taking part in this revolution, but many educators are dragging their feet on this issue.

Regardless of the cause of this attitude, whether it be organisational, pedagogical, or philosophical, there needs to be a fundamental shift in the way educators view technology in their classrooms.

The creation of centres such as the Australian Digital Futures Institute at USQ is a great step forward, but change is slow and will continue to be slow. There seems to be a bit of a reliance on younger-generation educators to initiate the change, but these staff seem to be viewed more for their technical skills as opposed to their pedagogical skills. In my experience, staff with pedagogical e-Learning skills are moved into more IT-tech roles due to their relative inexperience in teaching. The problem this creates is two-fold:

• The change that needs to occur isn't, because the drivers and innovators are not being given the opportunity to push the change forward.
• The drivers and innovators, particularly younger ones, are becoming frustrated and are beginning to walk away from teaching roles.

In the past 3 months I know of several younger colleagues around Australia who have walked away from secondary education because they were seen as useful, not for HOW they used the technology in the classroom, but for their skills in troubleshooting issues for staff.

So - eBooks are an indication of the way forward, but until these four issues change or begin to change, I dare say we are a fair way off from them replacing the old paper textbook.

I believe we have a long way to go before the traditional textbook is dead. Furthermore, I also believe we have a long way to go before the e-Textbook is a viable alternative to the traditional medium (100% of schools going 1:1 is the starting point, IMO).

However, initial research shows that there is an improvement on the way. Teacher perspectives in an infographic can be seen here.

Two questions come to mind about this:

#1. What was the context of the research?

#2. Are these feelings translated into practise and outcomes?

We need to be careful in this discussion that we don't miss the point. The cynic in me says that a fair whack of these teachers surveyed have been distracted by the "oooohhh, shiny" factor associated with e-textbooks.

But, that is just me...

I'm a conservative sort of guy. Really. I don't believe in change for change's sake. In fact, unless you sell to me why we need things to change, then I'll fight you on the beaches, on the mountains, and in the air to make sure change doesn't happen. However, once sold on the message, I will fight FOR you, not against you.

My biggest frustration in working in education is that the industry as a whole, seems slow to change. Bureaucracy, funding and "we've always done it this way"-mentalities have been the three thorns in my side over the past three years.

With the Gonski report out and open for public debate, flogging & inaction talk has flared amongst my colleagues as to what exactly it will mean for us professionally, collegially and personally. It's interesting, sitting in the staffroom and hearing the conversations around it - what's ironic is that most people I have heard speak about it can't see the need for change. They're not sold on the message.

If we are to create learners for a global environment, then we need to ensure that our students are capable of the global best. To be honest - I don't think we are, and the Australian system is leaving it's students at a disadvantage.

So, what is going wrong?

Not all sections of the industry have been sold on the reason for change. To be honest, I don't think our politicians have been sold on it either, but that is another post for another blog. We need to keep improving ourselves, our students and subsequently, our society.

Without constant improvement, we will begin to stagnate and decline.

"Ok, we got 3 A's, 6 B's and 11 C's, 6 D's and 3 E's. We achieved the bell curve, congratulations folks!"

The bell curve is great - it gives us measurable proof that we haven't and can't change. Until I am able to get all 30 students in the A column, I'm going to be reviewing, re-evaluating and changing. Otherwise all I am going to do is flog the horse until it's dead. What you did yesterday is great for yesterday and may be good for today. Eventually, it'll collapse and you'll get overtaken.

Then what do we do?

Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to you all! I've been travelling on the East Coast of Australia this break and am enjoying every minute of it so far! I'm just north of Newcastle and am basing myself here for another week or so visiting family.

Just before I took off on this little trip, I had some time to talk with a colleague about digital learning. What's funny is that I was very quick to be able to tell him what digital learning wasn't. Formulating what it was I found a bit trickier.

Why?

Becuase of the poor experiences I had doing online courses.

I didn't let my disappointment with that one institution's online TESOL course phase me. I enrolled in another institution but was aghast as to what it actually entailed.

1. Assessments Could Not Be Digital.

That's right. All assessments had to be HAND-WRITTEN you needed to get questions wrong. Wait, what?

Yep - there was a note from the course-coordinator saying that if you got 100% on the assessment, you would have plagiarised; therefore, you failed.

But that's ok. The assessment was only a 52 page workbooklet.

2. I got 100%

I studied my guts out for this and revised, revised, revised. Guess what? I got 100%. I must have plagiarised, therefore, my mark was reduced to 43% which was the exact same amount that did not require rote-learnt answers.

At this point, the institution made a familiar mistake:

3. They assumed continuous enrolment

I didn't move to the town that had this institution. I didn't have family in town. I had never seen this lecturer, or held a conversation with them. Therefore, withdrawing was easy. No relationships were ever forged, no love lost.

What's my likelihood of ever enrolling in a unit with them again? Zero. None. Nada. Zilch.

So, what have I learnt throughout this whole saga:

1. Put experts in charge

2. Ensure the experts know what they are doing with online learning

3. Ensure the assessments are new, relevant and integrate some online components into it.

4. Don't assume continuous enrolment

These are just some of the integral components of running an online environment. What does this mean for running an online institution or having part of your institutions teachings run online?

That, my dear friends is another post for another time.

For whatever reason, I have to keep studying. There's something about learning new things and then being measured as to how well I have understood them that is just exhilirating for me.

Working in the profession that I work in, and based in the third most remote city in Australia means that my options for learning are somewhat limited except for the internet.

I completed three online units as part of my B Arts/GDipEd and I found most of them as boring as watching grass grow.

"Go online. Read the readings. Post a 200 word comment about said reading. Contribute to another persons discussion. See how innovative this is."

This was pretty much the routine. So, I started my GCTESOL online and completed two units in a semester. Boo-yah! That was great! Podcasts, wikis, interactive presentations - amazing! However, things got ugly then.

Here's what happened:

1. The next unit was a re-branded version of one of the units I had completed in first semester.

Same content. Different course code. Mandatory course. Instead of the lectures being posted online, transcripts were posted online. The first assessment task was exactly the same, but had an additional 750 words added onto them and a different referencing system.

Well, I thought I would suck it up and deal with it. However, not wanting to undermine the educational process and also not wanting to get busted for submitting the same assessment twice, I started a new topic. I e-mailed the lecturer asking for his thoughts on an issue I was wrestling with. Response:

"I am not an expert in this field - I am a microbiologist, I really don't know, sorry."

I then asked a specific question about the context of one of the set texts we needed to examine.

"I think it is occurring in a university setting, not sure, though. Besides, this isn't really relevant."

2. The institution thought that hiring an expert in the field was optional because it was an online unit.

Just because it isn't face-to-face unit doesn't mean that the knowledge requirements are any different.

3. Online submission was not allowed.

That's right. All assessments had to be express posted to the institution. The most basic of e-mail technology was outrightly banned for this unit.

4. An expert marked the assessments.

Then, the real kicker came in. I nearly crashed and burned in the assignment because an expert marked my essay. I had no assistance from the lecturer on a crucial issue, missed it, and then an expert crucified me because of it.

One of the comments:

"You wrongly identified the text as occurring within a university setting. It is not. It is a secondary school setting and this context changes the whole social interaction that is occurring here. That fact that you missed this means that you were not able to draw results that were of a high standard."

5. Existing knowledge of the students was not recognised.

The second assessment required us to compare and contrast two samples of speech, and the samples were provided. Because I had experience in dealing with Australian Aboriginal English (AAE), I compared that with the Standard Australian English (SAE) sample provided.

The SAE text was straight forward. Then I listened to the AAE sample. Problem. This was not a typical AAE sample. I work with AAE everyday of my life. I know what it sounds like, and this was not it. I contacted the non-expert lecturer. His response:

"The speech is different enough, just do the assignment. Nobody else has chosen these two samples to examine, so it's not really worth us trying to find a genuine AAE sample now."

I did some research at this point and discovered that the AAE sample was in fact being spoken by John Williamson, the country singer.

At this point I lodged a complaint and withdrew from the unit. I also quit that institution as this was a mandatory course. This leads me to the sixth mistake they made.

6. The institution did not understand that ONE bad unit could cost them a continuing enrolment.

I am the type of person who does not like to leave something half finished and I had a real knot in my stomach about withdrawing. But, I could not, in good conscience continue my studies there. Especially when I looked at the final unit. 50% of it was going over the same stuff again. 20% of it was new. 30% of the course seemed irrelevant (why do we need to know about the economic effects of linguistic cross-cultural barriers?).

One of these errors alone is, in my opinion, a critical. It's a sure-fire way to reduce student experience, student outcomes and student retainment. They also say something more about the way the institution approached online learning. Did they fluke the first two units I did? Or did the good staff move on because of a fundamental internal shift?

Relating it back to business, it is the same concept that Dennis Price talks about here in his Eyewitness Account of how a business destroyed itself.

Keep the internal eye on the students, the customers, and the rest will follow.

I've been teaching the Years 10-12 Business program at my school for 2 years now. We have the highest grade average in the system and I have only had one student graduate and not go into full-time study or employment. To cap it off, in my end of course survey, not one single student said they disliked or hated the course. Most said they enjoyed it or loved it and 100% said they found the assessments to be really interesting and engaging. I don't want to toot my own horn, but I think I'm doing a good job here.

So, what I am about to say next may come as a surprise...

Over the next 6-12 months, I will be conducting a review of the program and will be asking various employers, trainers and academics to go over what I do with a fine tooth comb and assess whether or not I am preparing students for their needs.

Why?

I don't want to rest on my laurels. This year was a huge pat on the back for me professionally, but I know I can do things better. It's not going to be easy, and I'm preparing to have some tough questions asked, but this a process of critical reflection and assessment.

Here's the process I intend on going through, and I would like you to comment on it as well, if you feel you can:

1. Assess what the expectations are of employers, VET trainers and tertiary institutions when they take on a student graduating from a high school Business program.

2. Compare the expectations of the Post-School Institutions (PSI) with the curriculum outcomes for the program.

3. Compare the curriculum outcomes with the actual student outcomes.

4. Seek feedback from PSI's as to what the current student outcomes are.

5. Identify which areas can be changed, and which ones cannot be changed.

6. With assistance from PSI's and leading Business Educators make appropriate changes to the program.

7. Reflect on the process - how did it go, what difficulties were encountered and could the model be applied to my other teaching areas?

I'm relatively happy with the seven steps outlined above, but that is just me. However, I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't ask for feedback on this. What are your thoughts on the process? Obviously there will be more detail and milestones added, but is this a good starting point?

This is going to sound weird, but I love having performance appraisals. And not because I tend to go well, either (actually, my first one was 50/50 in "Areas of Excellence" and "Areas for Development"). I like being held accountable for what goes on within the four walls of my classroom. Furthermore, I like having someone I respect come in, observe of my lessons and critique how it went.

It seems to me that I am a very small minority in the teaching profession. Outside of the medical profession, where will you find a single workplace where there is such a large gathering of people who have at least a a four-year undergraduate degree? Teachers are a well-educated lot. We are used to marking and giving feedback, yet many teachers I know hate receiving it. Why?

The system in which I work in requires us to teach to "Performance Standards". I hold my students accountable for their performance and rate them on an A-E scale against these performance standards. Recently, I was invited to cross-check other teachers rating of students against these same standards. We hear this term: "The moderators" and "The Board" bandied about as if they are some sort of anonymous bogeymen who seek to criticise, cut down and dismantle other teachers and their students. Here I was, dressed in a suit, sitting in a university tutorial room, doing "moderation" for "the board". I had become one of the anonymous bogeymen, and I was in a room full of these anonymous bogeymen and somewhere, one of these anonymous bogeymen was reviewing MY work with MY students and confirming MY assessment of their performance.

I found myself becoming quite apprehensive about the whole process and began to think of ways in which I could find the anonymous bogeyman who was looking at my work so I could justify myself to them. This kept running through my head consistently over the two days in which the moderation took place.

Once the process was over, I spent my flight back reflecting on what I had been doing. I found myself making a list of all the things I would need to change in 2012 in response to what I had seen in my role of being the anonymous bogeyman. I have 6 pages worth of notes across 3 subjects outlining what I need to change, what I need to include, and how I can approach the new subjects I have in 2012.

I started to feel a whole lot more relaxed about the process - if my grades are changed, and my assessment was off, then I know what I need to do to improve. If my grades are confirmed, then I still have a list of things I need to change and prepare for in 2012 if I am to maintain my standards.

Accountability and teaching seem to be oxymorons. Teacher Unions, Federations, Organisations, Lobby Groups, etc. see accountability in the same way that the Reserve Bank sees Inflation. It's something to be held at bay.

Teachers seek to improve student performance, and improve student outcomes. But who teaches the teachers? Who improves the teachers? We hold the red pens, we make the lines, we give the grades. It's about time we should be able to look in the mirror, open the cabinet and take some of our own medicine. It may not taste nice, but it will do us good.

I have not been teaching. Nor have I been facilitating. I have not prepared anything. In fact, my only instruction to these classes for the past 3 weeks has been: "Be productive."

I have not been checking work. Nor have I been keeping the students accountable. I have spent 600 minutes just observing and being a sounding board for these two classes.

Results?

Only 3 students have not been doing schoolwork. 40 students, 2 classes, 300 minutes each. 37/40 students chose to study. Some summarised notes in their books. Others formed study groups and taught each other what they knew about an upcoming topic exam. 2 girls had an animated debate over which management theory would be more applicable in a cosmetics store/beautician.

It's time we as educators changed the way we thought. We say that we encourage self-directed learning, but dictate to students what they have to do minute by minute, hour by hour, day by day.

Is it just me, or does this not add up?

Is it any wonder why kids are so disengaged and frustrated in school?

Why is that we tell kids that they are unique and then demand that they all learn the same way at the same time?

It's time to take a deep breath and watch. Watch and wait. Wait and observe. Observe and learn. Learn and change. Change and improve. That's my goal. I'll never be the perfect teacher. I'll just be the best I can be.