As I add to the multiple blog posts around the internet on the paperless classroom, I consider the purpose of writing this at all. Everything has been said already right? Well, not quite...

As every moment goes by, someone creates a new tool, a new technology, a new method to make going paperless that much easier, smoother, less prone to disruption and overall just a little bit better. The first blog posts I started reading about going paperless were about 10 years ago. A lot has changed since then, and that change needs to be documented. So here is my 2 penneth. In summary, I try and address these questions

• What is going paperless?

• Why go paperless?

• Why have some not gone paperless?

• What can go wrong?

• How is it easier than before?

• What tools did I use?

Distance learning is nothing new. The Open University have been doing distance learning since 1971, but the Internet, invented two years earlier, had nothing to do with it. The network of computers, which was then called the ARPANET was very much in it's infancy, and was not vast enough or accessible enough at that point to make an impact to the world of education. So distance learning had to rely on snail mail and it worked.

Things have moved on since then, thank goodness, and nearly 50 years on we now have technology that is faster, more efficient and more effective. However, how much of a viable alternative is it? What I'm talking about, isn't just youtube videos, Khan Academy or any of those other online courses with pre-recorded material such as Lynda.com and Udemy.com and the like. I'm talking about live, tutor lead instruction via video. This is, I believe, the most advanced alternative to face to face instruction that exists. With all the tools enabling us to do this at our disposal, I'd like to discuss two of them, the two I have had the most educational experience with, Google Hangouts, and Spires tutoring platform.

"Disrupt", the not so new, buzz word that all the tech journalists and bloggers have been using for the past few years. It's been bandied around the interwebs like cheap confetti to describe technologies and models that people think can upset the status quo and revolutionise the industries in which they belong. It's even been used in parodies of the technology industry, like in the Sitcom Silicon Valley. Whether the term is used accurately enough or not, when it comes to the education sector, and secondary (k12) education in particular, people need to be careful, otherwise, they can do more harm than good. I'll explain below exactly what I mean, and why the opposite may be what the education sector needs right now.

It's been another long while since my last blog post. A few months, in fact, have gone past and a lot has happened which has managed to keep me from writing. The main change, however, has been the birth of my son, who happens to be about 6 months old now. I must say, having a child is a truly amazing experience and despite the sleepless nights, damaged ear drums (from the high pitched crying) and the huge hole in my wallet, I'm thoroughly enjoying it.

However, one important thought sprung to mind shortly before he was born, and has been a serious talking point for my wife and I ever since. As a tech geek and an advocate for technology use for learning, what does the research say about young children's use of technology and screen time? How will technology use affect my son's learning and future development?

From my basic research, I couldn't identify any definitive answers. However, a few running themes did occur.

1. No screens for children under 3

2. Restrictions for older children

3. It's not all bad 

I got laughed at a few weeks ago by IT technicians. What was the cause of the redicule? 

I asked for a CD...