In my title, I put “21st century education” in quotes because I don’t think that what I define as 21st century eduction is necessarily the same as what some proponents mean by the term. The video, Learning to Change- Changing to Learn” (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tahTKdEUAPk) is typical of what I’ve seen in that, as with many of the 21st century skills movement annunciations that I’ve read or seen, there are some things I agree with, some things I think are not really new (i.e. not 21st century, but important educational practices that have existed for many years, perhaps even thousands of years in good education), and some things that I think are bad ideas and which will not lead to better educated students.
The following quotes may not be exact, but are meant to show my understanding of what the speakers in the video meant. This does point to one of the limitations of teaching from online-only content in that I have no opportunity to question the speakers for clarification of their views, and unless readers of this blog choose to compare their understanding with mine, I have no feedback as to whether I have misinterpreted what I have read or heard, or if there might be more useful ways to think about this information. The video is already highly edited and may reflect the views of the editor as much or more than the individuals quoted. For example, at least one speaker was truncated at the beginning of their segment in a way that didn’t reveal their true opinion until clarified in their second sentence. As a consumer of on-line material it is important to remain cognizant of the fact that the person presenting the material may have an agenda that is not shared with participants or the audience.
To start on a positive note here are some thoughts that I (mostly) agree with:
“We have to accept as educators that technology is not really a choice. It has created a world. It’s not just here to help teach traditional subjects. It has emerged a completely new environment.”
“It’s about relationship, community, it’s about connectivity. It’s about access.”
“Give teachers a place where they can swap authentic ingredients and their evidence of those ingredients.”
Regarding standardized testing… “economically a foolish idea, because the jobs that these students will be having do not call for this kind of right answer, vending machine approach.”
“For the last 100 years schools used an industrial factory metaphor. It was about control and order.”
“The students is at the center, and school is just one of the ways that they learn. They also learn through communities, at home, at museums, libraries, and of course on-line.”
I have to point out that in this last quote only the on-line experience is new. What we’re talking about is increasing access for those that have not traditionally had it. Educated parents have always seen school as only one part of their children’s learning. In some ways, participation in “communities, at home, at museums, libraries” etc., is actually in danger of decreasing due to the economic effects of things like the increased needs for both parents to work, single family homes, less community involvement and increased life on-line, and reduction of funding for community facilities such as libraries. I believe it will take an ongoing effort by those that believe these things are important enough to provide for all citizens to ensure they receive the funding they need to provide access for all and not just the wealthiest citizens.
Some statements I don’t agree with, or feel that as expressed they are too limiting or do not fit in with what I have experienced in my own experiences as a parent or in my (limited) time in the public schools. Some of these ideas I see as worthy goals, but I do not believe that just adding new technology will prepare students for accomplishing these goals. I also believe that some of these ideas are naive in that they don’t show an awareness of what is known about how people learn. Just as there have been technological advancements, I believe there have also been advancements in our understanding of how humans learn. I recently read the book “Why Don’t Students like school? A Cognitive Scientist Answers questions about how the Mind Works and What it means for the Classroom” Willingham (2009), and I recommend it as an introduction to recent thinking on how people learn and how teachers can increase the chances of their teaching making it into the students’ long term memory.
“Every turned off device is potentially a turned off child.”
Well no, I don’t think this is true. More input doesn’t translate into more learning. It does lead to less attention and the temptation to stick with what’s easy. I’d say it’s wrong to discount any devices potential for learning, but that is a far cry from thinking the device is the learning.
“Students today are big content developers through social media. Big communicators through email and instant messaging & text messaging. Yet, all those things are banned from their schools.”
In my experience none of these are banned. There are questions of when they can be used. There are questions of whether underprivileged students have access. There are questions about how to incorporate them in ways that increase learning. However, I don’t think the solution to any of these issues is to allow unfettered use by students.
“They will be doing work that calls on their artistic abilities, abilities of synthesis, understanding context, working in teams, ability to be multidisciplinary, multilingual, multicultural…”
I have similar issues with both this quote and the next one. I feel they both make the assumption that the technology itself will be sufficient to create change. People need context, they need facts to think about. This kind of knowledge is something that must be absorbed and incorporated into memory in a way that allows for connections. The fact that you can now find the material to think about much more easily using technology doesn’t change significantly the difficult task that students face in acquiring the skills they need to interpret this material. Willingham (2009) talks about the fundamental difference in how experts think about their area of expertise compared to how learners process the same information. One can no more become an expert on a topic without intense study and practice than a violinist can become a world-class performer. So, while I don’t disagree that technology has changed how information can be acquired, I don’t agree that this eliminates the need for the hard work that students have always had to do to become truly knowledgeable. This also speaks to why the top experts are not always the best teachers. Just as important as understanding the subject is having an awareness of how students learn and what challenges they face in understanding ideas that seem obvious to the expert. While there are amazing resources available on the Web that were not available to most student even 10 years ago, very little of this material is prepared with an eye toward dealing with how beginners learn. I feel that this expands the role of, and the importance of, the teacher— much to the discredit of the final quote.
“The coin of the realm is not memorizing the facts that they will need for the rest of their lives, it is so you know how to find information, validate it, synthesize it, leverage it, communicate it, do you know how to collaborate with, to you know how to problem solve with it. That’s the new 21st century set of literacies. It looks a lot different than the schools that most of us were raised with.”
“The death of education, but the dawn of learning.”
What does this quote even mean? Perhaps the speaker’s idea of what education is conflicts with mine. I’d say the use of technology in the classroom has the potential to be the start of a new renaissance in education that also models for students how they themselves can incorporate technology and lifelong learning into their lives and future work. In conclusion, I would hope that I have made the case that while I am far from a Luddite, I am also not willing to accept technology alone as the answer to our challenges in education.
