What does innovation look like?

This week I spent time with the SAUSD AI & Innovation Site Leads. Our focus was on innovation and what that really looks like with regards to instructional practices.  We started by sharing innovative practices on our campuses and aligning them with the SAMR model. We discovered that while SAMR might have been a good way to categorize instructional practices that leverage instructional technology tools in the past, it is now oversimplified for our current context. For example, think about students using annotation software like Kami to complete a worksheet. If the student is simply filling in answers, is that innovative? But what if the student is using Kami to have the pdf read to them, then highlighting key ideas and adding insights directly onto the document? Is that innovative? Or how about a teacher using a gamified platform like Quizizz to help students master vocabulary or math facts? What we found was that the level and definition of "innovation" varied by teacher and by school. An instructional practice that is seen as innovative in one setting, might fall into the category of standardized instructional practice in another. 

IBM PS2

When a new technology is introduced, we early adopters jump in and try different strategies. We create "innovative" lessons and learning experiences for our students. Some of these lessons are just fun, while others impact learning, and the rare few have the power to shift instructional practice. But for some reason, many teachers have shied away from innovating with instructional technology. "It's too hard." "I don't have time to learn something new". "I don't have time because I have to get through the curriculum." I've heard it all. But trying out new strategies, especially those utilizing technology does not mean you need to abandon everything you are already doing. I view innovation as intentionally trying a new strategy or tool to see if it will positively influence student learning.  

In 1991, my principal at Franklin Elementary in Santa Ana, CA, asked me to write a grant to purchase computers for our school. With only a little personal experience with computers, I agreed to write the grant. I had a lot of research to do. My first stop was the Spring CUE Conference in Palm Springs California (1991). I met with every computer vendor in the exhibit hall, and attended countless sessions. After reviewing our site goals, we decided to focus on student writing using IMB PS2s (circa 1993), networked! At the time, IBM was the only company that had a reasonably priced, networked system appropriate for use in a school setting. We were awarded the grant and purchased the system and the Franklin Computer Lab was born!  All students and teachers were trained on how to access the writing software and print their work on the dot-matrix printer. We also purchased LinkWay, an IBM program that allowed students to create multimedia presentations. This was revolutionary and extremely innovative for the time. It was also the first experience most of the students (and many of the teachers) had ever had using a computer. I remember one student who kept typing the same 4 sentences over and over again. When I asked why, she said as she started another sentence, the top one would disappear. Scrolling was a new concept. One teacher kept putting the mouse on the screen and couldn't figure out why the cursor was not moving. In a sense, we had to rewire our brains to make sense of this new innovation. But the true innovation was not the computers themselves, but rather what we did with them. Our "Young Writers' Project" empowered teachers and students to think differently about writing. Writing was no longer just an exercise for the teacher to read, but rather a collaborative activity with a larger audience. 

The introduction of the computers to support student writing helped students gain confidence in writing. We saw 2 major shifts: 1) students wrote more because, and 2) Students took more pride in their work.  These shifts were facilitated by the new technology. The word processing program allowed students to add details to the middle of their writing, easily fix errors, and reduced the stress of having to have "perfect" handwriting. Using the computer to type reduced the pressure on being perfect the first time.

30 years later, Hello Generative AI!
Generative AI has provided increased opportunities for innovative practices in the same way that basic instructional technology did 30 years ago. However, innovation is less about the tool and more about the pedagogy being applied. 

Here are three activities that leverage generative AI to engage students. I encourage you to try them out and provide your feedback. I purposefully have not included the full lesson plans. Rather, I encourage you to think about how Generative AI has been used to create innovative experiences for students.  As you play, reflect: 

1. Do you consider this activity innovative? 
2. What's missing? 
3. How can this activity be modified to become part of an impactful instructional practice? 

Click on the Choice Board for more details or use the links below:

Activity #1: The Guardians of Digitopolis  - A game to teach students about digital citizenship. (Target audience grades 3-6)

Activity #2: Chat with a Hero  (Target audience grades 5-8)

Activity #3: Practice with Different Sentence Types (Target audience - adult English Learners)

I look forward to hearing your thoughts. Innovation shouldn't be a buzzword. It should be a process through which we seek to improve. It involves creativity, experimentation, and the application of new technologies or approaches to achieve progress.