Comments on: Words are just words

By: Kim FLINTOFF

Kim FLINTOFF — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 04:17:30 +0000

While empty metaphors do have their place and they can serve an educational purpose I agree that clear understanding of your objectives and indicators of learning are important.

I think we’re at the stage where to some extent we need to abandon existing notions of “teaching” and start to redefine our relationship with learners. We are never engaged solely as the arbiter of knowledge – we are always a co-learner; if at the least in learning about our students, and often in terms of our understanding of content, processes and practices…

“21st Century Skills” will always be interpreted… the challenge is that clearly stated outcomes about specific skills often have the effect of being treated as an end-point rather than a staging point…

By: Tony Searl

Tony Searl — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 07:16:54 +0000

Students will soon be the administrators as industrial walled garden gatekeeper models of education unknowingly add solvent to their own internal structures.

If centralised departments of education continue to attempt to maintain their authoritative hold on learning, it just can’t work, not for very much longer at least. Learners are realising the flat world is also their learning world and are voting with their digital feet, in tertiary institutions at least.

The strong glue of communities that students adopt, build and enliven will be the future educational landscape sooner rather than later.

As professional, standards enforced, learning hubs called “Forcebook” etal with dedicated learning conciarges and ATAW learning become common if not universal within 10 years traditional teaching/learners roles will completely blur.

Normative not summative assessment will predominate and pointless end/exit testing will be shown up for what it is.

Schools will exist for social f2f skills development, reporting back on rael community projects and traditional hands on subjects, but they will blend with the virtual and online learning communities.

Developing countries or lagging opportunities at the bottom of their educational cycles are at a massive advantage. They do not have to undo centuries of now disconnected established edupractice and as ubiquitous technology allows the fish to not see the water, these systems will prosper exponentially.

The top of the exponential scale is the hardest incremental improvement. Current systems playing it conservatively safe or resting on laurels of tradition will be under increasing pressures as emerging new learning rapidly closes the disadvantage gap. Shift happened alright.

The change pain still needs to be felt in some first world countries but a decade is all they have.

By: Sheri Edwards

Sheri Edwards — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 01:14:44 +0000

I wonder if the students will eventually be the final voice: How much longer will students wait for the education they imagine? How long will it be before they voice their preferences? Aren’t they already creating, collaborating, and communicating outside of school on issues important to their lives? Perhaps they will self-organize for learning without schools while the “authorities” continue to stifle the local teacher-leaders attempting to engage learners as responsible, respectful, and productive citizens because students are already interconnected and interacting globally? Perhaps the students will develop from their social networks their own learning networks because they are very tired of the empty words and empty work.

By: sylvia martinez

sylvia martinez — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 19:55:59 +0000

Hi Andrew,
Thanks for the thoughtful comment. I think a lot of us are grappling with these issues as the world changes around us. Nothing stays the same, but trying to define what education is (or how is should be) based on simple technology updates doesn’t seem well grounded.

As humans, we are wired to notice change – it’s literally in our genes. But I don’t think those ancient hunter skills suit us well when we try to think about the big picture.

By: Andrew Garcia

Andrew Garcia — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 14:29:56 +0000

I’m in the same place with regard to Obama’s ultimate beliefs on Education (Tech). I’m in waiting….What really hit home here, though, is the notion that our choice of words to describe 21st century learning/web 2.0/edtech can have vastly different meanings for many in education and political arenas.

Having just completed and presented ‘Web 2.0 in Education for Teachers’, it has become obvious that it is a difficult task to truly define the totality of student engagement and learning that can result from effective use of (web-based) technology.

As I re-read your article in Educational Leadership this morning, I was mentally taking note of how you defined ed. tech. in varied instances. Then I visited your blog and discovered you are grappling with the issue–as it relates to actual meaning for ed-tech-newbies.

After three hours of presentation where teachers seemed truly engaged, one question at the end of the session drove the point home: “So, what exactly is Web 2.0?”

We have a long way to go. Thanks for your efforts…
AG