The impact of 1-1 devices in the classroom, 5 years of experience.

I have seen the challenge of what students do with their digital devices in the classroom. My classroom has been 1-1 for about 5 years now.

The presence of the technology has driven me to change my teaching style. You can complain about that fact if you like, but it has forced me to innovate. Not everything I have tried has been successful, but my classroom looks hardly anything like it did 10 years ago.

I hardly ever teach from the front of the room in a lecture style. I haven't asked students to copy notes off of a chalkboard/whiteboard/overhead in ages. (I actually picked up chalk and taught one lesson from the blackboard late in the school year and it felt strange! It was the correct tool for that lesson at that time however.) 

When I do teach from the front I insist that all devices be closed.

I always try to have my seating arrangements set up so that all the student's screens can be seen from one location. If I have flexible seating arrangements, none of the places students can sit allow them to put their backs to the wall and hide what they are doing.

I have also found it necessary to change the kind of assignments I give. I started, like most teachers, by taking the same lessons I used to do and putting them online. That went over like a lead balloon! (Which exist if you watch the MythBusters!) When you put an assignment up that can be answered in 5 minutes by using CTRL-F and CTRL-C and CTRL-P you realize that you really need to change your assignments. (And maybe should have changed them years ago!)

It's not always pretty, it's not always perfect, but it has forced me to re-think just about everything I do in the classroom. And that's not a bad thing.

The Case for Christ Student Response #11

In the first term of the school year 2016-2017 my grade 7/8 class has read The Case for Christ: Student Edition by Lee Strobel. At the end of the study of the book each student was asked to answer one of the questions posed in the chapters of the book. I told that I would be sharing their responses online. So, throughout the rest of the year I will be posting their work. Please note, I have not edited these responses, they are exactly what the student handed me.

The Question: If archaeology shows that the New Testament writers were accurate in reporting historical and geographical details, does this increase your confidence that they would be similarly careful in recording events about Jesus? Why or why not?

The Answer: Unlike the famous Indiana Jones movie Raiders of the Lost Ark the real ark of the covenant has not been found yet. Just because it hasn't been found does that mean it does not exist? In Ethiopia a church called The Chapel of the Tablet at the Church of Our Lady Mary of Zion claims to have the original ark inside the church but no one has ever been inside to see it. There are clues within the Bible supporting the fact that the ark could be in Ethiopia.

There has not been any evidence found from archaeology that contradicts the Bible's writings. For example, in Luke 5:2, it describes the pool of Bethesda. It states the the pool has five covered porches. When archaeologists went to dig up the historical site they noticed that in the same place this pool had five covered porches.

When archaeologists go on digs they have a bias depending on their religious faith. If they are an unbeliever or an atheist they would most likely try to find artifacts contradicting the Bible's writings. Contradicting this, however, is the case of Sir William Ramsay of Oxford University in England. He spent 25 years doing digs trying to disprove the teachings in the book of Acts which was written by the historian Luke. During his digs he could not find anything to contradict the writings in Acts. Later, he was influenced by his findings and became a Christian.

Archaeology isn’t necessary to base your faith upon but provides visual examples from the Bible. Examples like how big Goliath was, the size and how many courts the temples had, the size of Noah's ark, are to name a few. When the Bible was translated did the number of days or months or years it took to created the world get modified? Translations were done by scribes

Because we found these things does that mean the accounts in the Bible are true? They do help them feel more trustworthy because there is nothing that disproves the facts and stories only artifacts that help prove. As Psalm 85:11 states, “Truth shall spring out of the earth.”

Jesus walked on the earth. He visited and preached from many historical places that have been discovered through archaeology. Like faith, we do not need to see it, or touch it to believe it. Jesus was not famous, in that there would be no statues or monuments to his name. He was poor therefore no big castle or worldly possessions to discover. Jesus life is recorded through eyewitnesses and passed down through generations.

The Bible itself is grounded in historical facts. So if the places, cities and remains of other people have been found and proven - why would we not believe that the story of Jesus is true?

Works Cited

@AiG. "Does Archaeology Support the Bible?" Answers in Genesis. 24 Jan. 2008. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.

"Does Archaeology Support the Bible?" Truth Or Tradition. Web. 20 Nov. 2016.

Strobel, Lee. The Case for Christ. Zondervan Pub. House, 1998. Print.

"Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered?" Has Archaeological Evidence for Jesus Been Discovered? | The Institute for Creation Research. Web. 22 Nov. 2016.

By Samuel Smith , CP Reporter. "Archaeological Discoveries Prove Jesus Existed, Disprove Atheist 'Mythicist' Scholarship, Book Claims (Interview)." Christian News, The Christian Post. Web. 22 Nov. 2016.

What can Christian Schools learn from churches?

I recently discovered a pastor by the name of Carey Nieuwhof. He writes a blog and runs a podcast about leadership in churches. (Oh yeah, he pastors a church too.) I've been really impacted by what he writes and the interviews he has on his podcasts. I highly recommend that you follow him. Check out his blog.

One recent post really made me think. He's been writing about trends that are impacting churches and wrote a blog post about the ones he thinks will be a big impact on churches in 2018. I've been wondering how many of these will and should impact Christian schools too. First, go read his post here. Then I'll share my two cents as to how this might apply to Christian schools here:

So here are my first thoughts on each point Carey raises as it relates to Christian schools. I'm certain we could go a lot deeper that these first surface impressions.

Point 1: A Move Beyond Church In A Box

The local school isn't going away and shouldn't go away. But why are we constrained by the four walls of a building? or even the kind of building? How can we leverage the tools we have to extend the reach of our schools?

Point 2: The Digital Will Become Real

I've heard from too many teachers/parents/administrators who don't believe that this is true. I've even heard it from students. This change is coming. Are we ready to act in this space?

Point 3: Location Independence Will Rise

I think this will become increasingly true at the high school level. The one reason it won't develop as strongly at the elementary level is because of Day Care. The local elementary school provides a place for parents to have their children during the day. That means that there must be a physical locale to which they go. But even with that true it will become increasingly possible to use remote tools in the classroom. What opportunities are there for us here?

Point 4: Pop-Up Churches Will Become More Common

This idea intrigues me. What if we did pop-up Christian schools? Day camps, week camps in the summer? Project Base Learning experiences that travel around the province? This is an interesting idea, although I'm not really sure how it would apply in the school context. I would love to explore it though!

Point 5: The Rise Of Preaching (More Than Teaching)

When I first read this point I didn't see how it could possibly apply to schools. But my thinking on this is changing. I see it in the way we run our schools. The emotional, relational, experiential components of school have become increasingly more important. I've certainly a significant change it what happens in the classroom during my short career as a teacher.

Point 6: A Desire For Non-Downloadable Experiences

I love the contrast between this point and his earlier points! Even as the digital becomes more important, the non-Digital is critical! We must identify those learning experiences that really only work in face to face settings and make those central to what school is. The challenge is, what are those experiences that are best face to face?

Point 7: The Team Is Eclipsing The Solo Leader

I find this pointing interesting. I see how much difficulty the Christian schools are having in finding administrators to run the schools. I wonder if the leadership model we're using needs to change and perhaps Carey's points about the team may hold parts of the answer.


So, there are my first thoughts. I think there's a lot more here to contemplate. I'd love to hear your thoughts too.

School is to hard, it's too boring

Yesterday I heard two students share with me their struggles with school.

One said, "School is so hard for me. Always."

The other said, "I have nothing to look forward to." (Which is why he deliberately got in trouble, because he wanted some excitement!)

For a long time there was only one way for us to do school. (Or at least we thought that way.)

We know that isn't true. School can be different. It should be different.

I'm tired of waiting for it to change. Are you?