Chris Lehmann recently posted about the book Disrupting Class (Chris needs to know he is not the last to read it, mine is still unread.)
Two posts I am reading today reference ideas related to this book.
One from Tim Stahmer:
…the current educational system – the way it trains teachers, and the way school buildings are laid out – is designed for standardization. If the US is serious about leaving no child behind, it cannot teach students with standardized methods.
While people have spent billions of dollars putting computers into US schools, it has resulted in little change in how students learn. And most products that the fragmented and marginally profitable education software industry has produced attempt to teach students in the same ways that subjects have been taught in the classroom.
The reason for this disappointing result [little or no improvement in learning] is that the way schools have employed computers has been perfectly predictable, perfectly logical – and perfectly wrong.
…when disruptive innovators begin forming user networks through which professionals and amateurs – students, parents, and teachers – circumvent the existing value chain and instead market their products directly to each other, … the
balance of powerin education will shift.
Another from Will Richardson offers this one sentence from Schlechty that sums it up beautifully:
Schools must be transformed from platforms for instruction to platforms for learning, from bureaucracies bent on control to learning organizations aimed at encouraging disciplined inquiry and creativity.
First I need to read this book, and second need to continue to tinker what I do to become closer to this. I have come a long way, but this will be an interesting year as we are purchasing question banks to help students do better on the state science assessment. There is a whole lot wrong there with that last sentence. Though they need help with questions, the emphasis on content and not process is still problematic and more of the same failed system.