Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial], 6(4). Available: http://www.citejournal.org/vol6/iss4/editorial/article1.cfm
Editorial: Are We Talking Only to Ourselves? Perhaps!
Michael Searsona
Kean University
In her 2004 article “Technology and Teacher Education: Are We Talking
to Ourselves?” Debra Sprague pointed out that in presenting an educational
technology agenda there are two general audiences: those within the field of
educational technology and those outside the field (read: external stakeholders).
The role of these external stakeholders in framing the context of the educational
technology agenda, particularly its funding, is likely to increase over the
next several years. One of the issues raised in the Sprague article is whether
we as educational technologists suitably engage the external stakeholders in
meaningful dialogue over the issues that are important to us. In other words,
how well does the educational technology community communicate with the external
community over the value of its work?
After all, the role of technology as an educational tool is located within
a complex system of interrelated groups and organizational structures: politicians
and governmental agencies, P-12 educational systems, higher education, profit-making
companies, not-for-profit organizations, the public sector, editorial writers
and the media, among others. Critical to this set of interrelationships is the
funding necessary to allow educational technology to serve as important learning
tool. Since public and private funding will remain crucial to the success of
the educational technology agenda, advocacy strategies to appropriately leverage
essential financial support are important.
At the fall 2006 National Technology Leadership Summit (NTLS) held in Washington,
DC, the role of advocacy was at the center of many discussions. In fact, a committee
on the topic of Legislative Advocacy spent two days deliberating on how those
of us dedicated to the role that technology could play as a meaningful educational
tool can be more effective when communicating with key external stakeholders,
especially those in the political arena. Many of the ideas developed by that
committee are represented in this article.
Cognizant that 2007 would see much deliberation over reauthorization of the
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), the committee also attempted to distill
what are the key features that all stakeholders concerned about education in
the 21st century can agree upon. It came up with two characteristics: accountability
and global competitiveness. Most agree that a long-standing legacy of NCLB will
be a commitment to sustained and appropriate accountability.
Although many hope that future assessment models go beyond the current overreliance
on test scores, all seem to agree that even forthcoming education models will
embrace accountability. Much attention, particularly in the popular press, has
focused recently on the ability of the United States to maintain a competitive
role in the emerging 21st century economy and political systems. While we can
debate whether the US should seek to remain the dominant player on the world’s
stage, we can agree that it should do everything possible to prepare its youth
to develop the critical skills, literacies, and knowledge to compete in the
21st century world. Obviously, the roles of education and technology are key
to developing well-prepared 21st century citizens.
How is it then that Thomas L. Friedman, a popular columnist for the New
York Times has arguably, with the publication of a single book, done more
than hundreds of passionate educators over many years to help people understand
the importance of facility with technology as 21st century skill? Many of those
deeply concerned about and committed to the role that effective educational
technology can play in shaping well-prepared students to become global citizens
have only to refer to The World is Flat and then eyes roll and heads
nod in agreement. It’s the economy stupid! How many of us find ourselves,
when making the same point that we have for years, come to that key moment that
we refer to The World is Flat and then people get it?
That leaves us with a couple of options—we can write a seminal bestseller
that will be influential across all sectors of society, or we can attempt to
incorporate effective advocacy efforts into our professional lives. Based on
the work of the Legislative Advocacy Committee NTLS 2006, here are some techniques
that can be used to enhance your role as an advocate for key educational issues—and
educational technology, in particular. (Suggestions are presented in no special
order.)
• Don’t reinvent the wheel—join and support
existing advocacy groups (e.g., the EdTech Action Network, ETAN, http://www.edtechactionnetwork.org/).
Most of the professional organizations associated with SITE have also formed
advocacy or lobbying subcommittees. Find out what is happening in your own associations.
• Work with local school leaders (e.g., superintendents) and
parents groups, (e.g., PTA), in developing local and statewide strategies
for more effectively implementing educational technology. For example, the combined
efforts of a representative from higher education, a school superintendent,
and president of a local PTA in speaking on educational issues can be quite
powerful.
• Make an appointment to visit your representative(s) whenever
you are in your state capital or in Washington, DC. Remember, they work for
you and are often motivated by hearing from their constituents. Although you
may not always get to meet with your state/federal representative or senator,
you should at least be able to sit down with the appropriate legislative aide.
Be sure always to follow up such visits with a thank you note (and a reminder
of the “ask”—see below).
• Be focused and don’t forget the “Ask.”
We are often passionate about the things that are important to us. However,
representatives have many constituents asking them to do many things. Specifically,
when you meet with your representative, what is it that you want him or her
to do? You may want to write down two to three “bullets” and stay
focused on them. Likewise, while meeting with important stakeholders on key
issues, it is very easy to become passionate about the topic but not ask the
person to do anything in particular. If you are meeting about a key piece of
legislation, at some point during your discussion be sure to ask your representative
to support it.
• Remember the other side of the aisle. With the political
arena becoming as polarized as it has been in recent years, many of us are more
comfortable (and perhaps more familiar with) one political party over the other.
Or perhaps, you live in a state or community where one party is clearly the
dominant one. When involved in advocacy (or lobbying—see below), you should
always maintain ties with both parties. As we saw in November 2006, political
winds can shift quite suddenly and dramatically.
• Have key stakeholders participate in special events. Whenever
possible (and appropriate) invite your congressional representative or the superintendent
of your local school district to special events you hold—especially those
of a celebratory nature. For example, when having a campus forum on the milestones
achieved by a federally funded grant you were awarded, you should invite you
local congressperson or senator to attend. They, too, should be joining in the
celebration.
• Compile success stories. Advocacy is almost always
strengthened by actual examples (particularly success stories) of what it is
you are advocating for. A classroom teacher’s report on student test scores
in writing that improved as a result of blogging is much more powerful than
simply advocating for the presence of blogging because it is a 21st century
tool.
• Make advocacy efforts part of your professional life.
Most educators belong to professional organizations. Most of those professional
organizations have now formed subcommittees devoted to advocacy and lobbying
efforts. Find out about such activities and see how you can support them.
• Understand the difference between “advocacy” and
“lobbying.” All of us are allowed to advocate for the causes
we believe in. However, under certain conditions, you may not be allowed to
participate in lobbying efforts, which usually involve activities related to
particular pieces of legislation or funding initiatives. For example, if you
manage a grant, you should be aware of any prohibitions on lobbying. Such a
prohibition may prevent you from using grant money to engage in specific lobbying
efforts. In practice, the distinction between lobbying and advocacy can be vague.
When in doubt, consult your local grants officer or the agency funding your
grant. Of course, if you are not using external funding sources to support your
efforts, there are few restrictions on your activities.
• Master the “Elevator” talk. Imagine if
you found yourself on an elevator with an influential congressional representative
or senator, what would you say? Remember, you would only have 30-45 seconds
to make all your key points. The ideal result of your effectiveness would be
that the representative or senator makes an appointment and discusses the issue
with you at greater length. As it turns out, most people who are involved in
advocacy efforts actually have had just such an experience. They have found
themselves in the presence—alone or in a small group—of a very powerful
person. Seasoned advocates have actually rehearsed their “elevator speech”
and know exactly what to say.
These, of course, are only some of activities in which those committed to advocacy
over educational issues can engage. In the end, however, they do allow us to
provide some answers to Sprague’s question, “Are We Talking to Ourselves?”
We can now respond, “No longer. We are talking to others. And we are doing
so more effectively!”
References
Friedman, T. (2006). The world is flat: a brief history of the 21st century
(2nd ed.). New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux
Sprague, D. (2004). Technology and teacher education: Are we talking to ourselves.
Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education [Online serial],
3(4). Retrieved December 6, 2006, from http://www.citejournal.org/vol3/iss4/editorial/article1.cfm
aThis article represents the combined efforts of all the members of the Legislative
Advocacy Committee, National Technology Leadership Summit 2006. Special thanks
go to Hilary Goldman, Director of Government Affairs, International Society
for Technology in Education, and Jane West, Vice President for Government Relations,
American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.