Well, I think the Tech&Learning 100@30 list just got a LOT more interesting…
New additions include a few popular edubloggers such as Chris Lehmann, Gary Stager, Joyce Valenza, and David Warlick. It’s not exactly clear how individuals are being chosen. It’s a weighty task to recognize the 100 most important people in the creation and advancement of the use of technology in education. Some folks, like Seymour Papert and Chris Dede and Henry Jenkins and Julie Young, are easy picks. Others, such as Albert Bandura and Linda Darling-Hammond and Howard Gardner and B.F. Skinner, seem to be more worthy for their work in learning and/or education generally rather than their work related to educational technology specifically? And still others, such as Arne Duncan and Gina Bianchini and Nancy Knowlton, arguably shouldn’t be on the list at all? And so on…
Take a look at the list (and, while you’re at it, look at the case I’ve made for Doug Levin in the comments area). Are there individuals that should be on the list that aren’t? Besides Levin, Cheryl Lemke, Elliot Soloway, Punya Mishra, Ken Kay, and danah boyd all come quickly to my mind. If we’re looking at edubloggers, perhaps Will Richardson, Stephen Downes, Vicki Davis, and/or Karl Fisch should be on the list? What about folks like David Wiley, Susan Patrick, John Willinsky, or Yong Zhao? Are there folks on the list – edubloggers or otherwise – that arguably shouldn’t be?
Image credit: Tech&Learning
I am appalled that Gary Stager has purchased my name, “Alan November” to advertise for his summer conference institute with Google adwords. His conference happens to take place during the same week as mine. Today, I clicked on his sponsored link enough times to max his daily hit count. I suggest that every one else do the same. It is an unethical thing to do…what do others think?
Scott – I was really honored to see my name appear on this list. It’s great to see my 28 years of work in classrooms around the world, pioneering efforts in 1:1 computing and online education recognized. I work hard to extend the legacy of old friends and colleagues like Seymour Papert, Leroy Finkel and Alan Kay (who is remarkably absent from the list).
That said, any list such as this is bound to disappoint. Every reader will question some inclusions and wonder why others have not been so honored.
Alan – My summer institute, Constructing Modern Knowledge, does indeed have overlapping dates with your event. My dates were selected and announced before yours. Had I been aware of the competition, I would likely have rescheduled Constructing Modern Knowledge.
I’m disappointed that you choose not to express your concerns privately. I’m quite easy to Google.
Instead you chose to advocate digital mischief on Scott’s blog.
The point of Google AdWords is to connect searchers’complementary interests and ideas. I invested pennies a day to connect many different keywords to searches. As the Web savvy readers of this blog know, hardly anyone ever clicks on featured links. That said, you have been removed from my list of adwords.
Alan, I’m flattered that you view my intimate hands-on institute as a threat to your much larger conference. Our events are quite different. I am quite confident that educators are smart enough to decide which type of learning experience best meets their needs.
Also, congratulations on your inclusion in the T&L list!
As a token of my appreciation for Dangerously Irrelevant readers, I’d like to offer a $150 discount on Constructing Modern Knowledge, thru June 10th. Please email gary@constructingmodernknowledge.com for a secret link.
Gary Stager, Ph.D.
http://www.constructingmodernknowledge.com
Gary,
You lost any respect of a private email when you chose to go public by buying my name from Google. Until you did this, no other educator has tried to take advantage of my reputation for their own personal gain. Next time you decide to do this to anyone else, have the courtesy to get in touch first to see how they feel about your actions. Learn to spell hypocrite.
Hi Gary,
Does the word hypocrite mean anything to you? Do you remember that article you wrote for Administrator magazine where you criticized me for recommending the World is Flat to educators. You said something about how foolish I was to recommend a business book to educators? I do not remember you calling me to check any of your facts. You just flamed me in public. Once you purchased my name in Google for the world to see in a desperate attempt to drive traffic to your website you lost the privilege of a private contact by me to tell you about the unethical nature of your very public act. The concept here is not about being threatened by your work. To my knowledge no one else in this business has ever done that to me. You are it. The point is I found you behavior unethical. Period.
I am amazed. What do brilliant minds like Bandura, Jenkins, Bruckman, Dede,& Papert have to do with names like Chris Lehmann, Gary Stager, Joyce Valenza, David Warlick and Alan November? Ummm oh yeah they all are listed in the 100 most important people in the creation and advancement of the use of technology in education. Come on.
Not to slight my contemporary colleagues but really? I mean really? CREATION AND ADVANCEMENT IN THE USE OF TECH IN EDC. I am sure their day will come but Papert and Bandura being on the same list with smart bloggers just seems totally off mark to me.
How about a list that has the 100 most important people in the creation and advancement of the use of technology in education and one that is for up and coming thinkers? What about George Siemens, Terry Anderson, Etienne Wenger, Nancy White, Bonnie Bracey, — shouldn’t folks like that come before bloggers?
Hi Cheryl,
Do you make stuff up just to get a rise out of people? Are you just having a bad day? Are you looking to insult people by calling them “just bloggers”?
We really do not know each other very well so I have no idea what motivated you to take such an insensitive position about judging that Chris, David, Joyce and I have no right to be compared to some of the other names in the top 100 by T&L. Just to let you know, I pioneered what is quite possibly the very first web based project in the country in 1984 when one of my students created an online database for 100 different agencies in Boston providing services for the handicapped. To my knowledge it was the breakthrough this country needed to see children as important contributors to their community over the web. Yes, 1984. To let you know, Seymour Papert has ordered my books. I also probably wrote one of the first statewide technology plans for Governor Sununu of New Hampshire in 1984. Further, I developed the concept of teachers and children bringing technology to the State Houses of Massachusetts and Illinois that resulted in many millions of dollars being allocated by the respective state legislatures for education technology. I also designed Pioneering Partners, a non-profit foundation that gave away millions of dollars to pioenering educators. Right now, you can type in energy.net on the web and see the results of another foundation I started in Illinois that prepares children to write energy audits for their communities. I could mention that my Teaching Zack to Think article from 1998 was a break through in defining web literacy. Indeed, your business partner, Will, has used a lot of my material in his workshops. By many accounts, my summer conference, Building Learning Communities is the most innovative in the country.
The other names you maligned all have equal if not greater accomplishments.
Perhaps you should ask Chris Dede and Seymour if I deserve to be on the same list as they are.
I hope you have a better day tomorrow.
Allen,
Sorry for any offense you took- but I believe you missed the point of my comment. Scholarly researchers who have deeply influenced creation and advancement and consultants, practitioners, and smart (thought leading) bloggers who model best practice need different lists.
My father was a brilliant electrical engineer who held many patents in the aerospace industry. One day, after I had started playing around with Visicalc (first spreadsheet) I told him how impressed I was with the programmers who had designed the tool. He told me, that the really important work is not done by the folks who invent the stuff, but by people who figure out what to do with it after it is invented. He made his point by telling me that the guys who invented TV were brilliant engineers but did not know what kind of programming to put on. Jack Benny came along and invented the talk show…It was Jack Benny who was the one who really promoted and advanced TV not the inventors. According to my father Creation and Advancement are equally important and usually accomplished by two different kinds of thinkers and doers. The reason I am sharing this story is that I agree that we do need to give credit to educators who are figuring out what to do with what emerges from our research labs. I happen to think they are of equal value. You can say they should be on separate lists and that is fine…Although you do mention Bonnie Bracie (whom I admire) should be on the list. Next time you see her ask her who gave her first her computer and gave her a vision of what to do with it.
PS: You gave me too much credit..I am a terrible blogger…
Sorry, but I just have to point out that AGAIN there are NO actual full time classroom teachers involved, much less representatives from elementary, middle and high school (or pre-school … or any school) – can you spell disconnect?. Both ironic, but very typical. I guess actual teachers aren’t really part of tech and learning? They aren’t some of the experts???? Hmmm. I wonder why teachers aren’t more involved in these endeavors?
You’re kidding me, right? The only people who care about this list are the people on it. If you’re counting a top 100 list in TechLearning as a benchmark for your contributions, you’ve lost it. All of you guys need to get over yourselves.
Alan and Gary,
Many of us hold you two in very high esteem. We all are appreciative of the numerous contributions that you’ve made to the field of educational technology and have learned a lot from both of you.
I’m not sure, however, that this public exchange on my blog is helping your causes. I don’t really believe in censoring blog comments, and thus am not going to delete anything that goes up here, but may I humbly suggest that you both might be better served by taking this disagreement into a more private channel?
All my best,
SCOTT
I am in full agreement with Scott. Remember WHY we are in this field in the first place. I have seen great value in the tireless work of Alan, Gary and everyone else who has been mentioned. The end point of our work is the students, with enriched communities and strategies for learning. Respectfully, we are all on the same side.
Kind regards,
Amy
Clifford Stoll is on the list? He spent years arguing against technology use by kids. And where is Roger Wagner? He was more than the creator of Hyperstudio, he is a fierce advocate of effective technology use based on student projects.
One can never know for sure what a deserted area looks like
Sent from my Android phone
Hello all, just want to clarify. The list is being created by readers and curated by editors. All of your comments and criticisms are welcome at the attached site.
That’s http://www.techlearning.com/article/26660, in case you didn’t see the link at the top of this page.
After a quick chat with my friend Chris today I realized that the tone of my comment might have caused offense where I didn’t mean to cause offense.
Chris Lehmann, Gary Stager, Joyce Valenza, and David Warlick please forgive me if I offended you. It truly wasn’t my intent. I consider you all friends.
I’m honored to be on the list, and just wish they had spelled my name correctly (David Thornburg, not ThornbErg)
They have been chosen because they don’t stand for anything truly challenging or controversial. They aren’t shaking up the status quo. All of those names are interchangeable in the discussion of Web 2.0.
The educational blogosphere is simply one huge knitting circle filled with virtual old biddies clucking at one another over the same topics.
All are also masters at the quid pro quo exchange of empty plaudits. Really, a majority of bloggers only do so for the attention, to make themselves feel good, to fulfill some deep seated need to belong to groups of strangers who will tell them how “awesome” they are.
I just don’t understand that at all.
The art of offering deserved praise has become so trivialized it’s not even worth accepting a compliment from anyone anymore.
At least I know that receiving a scornful comment is at least a true show of honesty.
No position or point is worth having unless you are willing to argue for its validity.