School's not out

If hyperlearning is the education mode of the future, I predict that although school is out, buildings will still be used to house students during the day, maybe in the form of day care centers. Unless, of course, their parents’ jobs have also evolved to the point where all parents work at home, which is unlikely. Anyway with day care centers, workers would be called care providers since they no longer teach; they only need to provide basic care. But what if the kids fight with each other, or trashes the computers, would the care providers intervene and “teach” the kids appropriate behavior. Or would hyperlearning tools cover that too?

I do not agree with Perelman (1993) that “there is no job in this economy that truly requires an academic diploma or degree for its successful performance”. I feel that there are many jobs that requires years of learning and training before a person can be pronounced as proficient. Although a diploma or a degree may not be needed as credentials, they do serve a purpose. Besides the academic diploma or degree also serves to impart confidence on those who the person with the credential serves. Imagine going in for a surgery, and not seeing the surgeon’s credentials. I partially agree with Perelman in the issue of employment decisions based on academic diplomas. Employers should not hire or promote based on the academic diploma alone but take into consideration other factors as well. A Harvard degree should never be judged more valuable than a Lehigh degree. And by the way, Perelman received his doctorate from Harvard University, and I’m sure this credential has worked to his advantage.

Education is for everyone, so let’s not forget the special education population. Parents and advocates have for years fought to have students with disabilities included in regular education classrooms with typical students. Fifty years ago most students with mental retardation do not get to participate in public education or be in the same school with typical peers, and we have only recently made progress in including students with disabilities and according to Gaskin settlement (Court orders/Gaskin, 2006), we still have a long way to go. If school’s out, I assume for regular education students, so then where is inclusion for special education students? Would students with disabilities return to their homes where historically they've been educated (or not) or will they remain in “schools” that will once again segregate them from their typical peers?

References

Court orders/Gaskin. (n.d.). The Pennsylvania Training and Technical Assistance Network (PaTTAN): A Professional Development Network. Retrieved April 18, 2006, from http://www.pattan.k12.pa.us/regsforms/CourtOrdersGaskin.aspx

Perelman, L., J. 1993. School’s Out. Wired Magazine. Issue 1.01. Retrieved on April 14th, 2006 from http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.01/hyperlearning_pr.html

Rethinking Assessment

I agree with Bond (1995) that assessments should inform teaching. Students should be assessed not just to gage their learning but also to inform the teacher on his/her teaching.
It is interesting though the idea of a revolutionary assessment that will require teachers to provide good instruction and to cover important learning outcomes. Clark and Clark (2000) state that schools “..must have assessment programs that complement the curriculum and encourage expansion, involve teachers in the design and implementation of assessment, and provide students with a challenging, active learning environment.” However under NCLB, it is inevitable that many teachers, especially in struggling schools, will teach to the test when it comes to high stakes testing and meeting AYP.

Growing up in a country where there is one national curriculum for all schools and where standardized curriculum-based assessments were held at certain milestones in a student’s life, reading this article seems to be counter intuitive. Students in Malaysia wear the same uniform, read the same textbooks, and take the same national examinations at the same time and day nationwide. If given a choice I would not want to go through those two weeks of pre-university examinations where students have to basically regurgitate all that they have learned in the last one and half years. Public university entrance is based solely on the result of this examination. And if a student were to fall ill during the examination period and is not able to take the examination, s/he would have to wait another year regardless if s/he is the top student in the school during school-based examination. No wonder I still get examination nightmares. However at the same time I am unsure if I would have learned better or more if I was brought up in the U.S.

References
Bond, L.A. (1995). Critical issue: Rethinking assessment and its role in supporting educational reform. Retrieved April 7, 2006, from the North Central Regional Educational Laboratory Website: http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/methods/assment/as700.htm

Clark, D.C., & Clark, S.N. (2000). Appropriate assessment strategies for young adolescents in an era of standards-based reform. The Clearing House, 73, 201-204.

Diversity and Multiculturalism

Historically, IQ tests have discriminated against students from culturally and linguistically diverse background by over identifying students from these minority groups into special education (Banks & Banks, 2004). Assessment and special education placement procedures have improved since then and Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) no longer allows identification based on a single test. However now with NCLB, we find that many schools that are failing to make AYP are schools with a large population of students from culturally and linguistically diverse background (Johnson, 2003). I have to agree with Reeves (1997) that multiculturalism and diversity are definitely not an international issue.

There is no such thing as a culturally neutral program and there is no such thing as a program that would be culturally appropriate for all students. However there is such thing as audience analysis and depending on the audience, the program could be modified to be more culturally sensitive. The danger is in the unwillingness of some people/companies in making the necessary modifications. While creators of educational programs are more than willing to modify their programs to be more culturally sensitive if they are going to sell it at a high price to large company in Taiwan, they may not be so willing to modify their programs for a few minority students in a small economically challenged school district. And even with the modifications, teachers/instructors play an important role in dealing with issues of diversity and multiculturalism in the classroom.

References

Banks, J.A., & Banks, C.A. (2004). Multicultural education: Issues and perspective (5th ed). New York: Wiley.

Johnson, T. (2003). Race, education, & No Child Left Behind: A guide for journalists. Oakland, CA: Applied Research Center.

Reeves, T.C. (1997). An evaluator looks at cultural diversity. Educational Technology, 37, 27-31.

Learning for Mastery

Almost forty years after the article by Bloom (1968) was published, many students are still failing in school. In some ways, the education system has “progressed”. Schools have moved away from the grading practices of that era. Many research studies in academic areas, especially in special education, focus on curriculum modification, curriculum-based measurement and peer-tutoring (Deno, 2003; DuPaul, Ervin, Hook, & McGoey, 1998;Umbreit, Lane, & Dejud, 2004). Many of these were mentioned by Bloom as variables for mastery learning. With the amount of money spent on educational research and improving instruction in school, it is sad that many students continue to fail.

Schools in this decade are facing a new challenge: school violence and problem behaviors. Current research studies focus on school-wide positive behavior support (SWPBS) and response to intervention (RTI) to intervene with the majority of students in school in terms of behavior and academic achievement respectively. SWPBS has shown to be effective in reducing office discipline referrals, and in some cases, improving academic performance in schools (Nelson, Martella, & Marchand-Martella, 2002). Bloom stated that the key to mastery is time, and with the advent of NCLB, that is one thing that students and schools do not have enough.

References

Bloom, B. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1, 1-11.

Deno, S.L. (2003). Curriculum-based measures: Development and perspectives. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 28, 3-12.

DuPaul, G.J., Ervin, R.A., Hook, C.L., & McGoey, K. (1998). Peer tutoring for children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: Effects on classroom behavior and academic performance. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 31, 579-592.

Nelson, J.R., Martella, R.M., & Marchand-Martella, N. (2002). Maximizing student learning. The effects of a comprehensive school-based program for preventing problem behaviors. Journal of Emotional and Behavioral Disorders, 10, 136-148.

Computers as Mindtools

I agree with Jonassen and colleagues (1998) that utilizing computers as mindtools would engage learners in critical thinking. However I disagree with their statement that mindtools would require students to think about what they know in different, meaningful ways. Students may think differently if they are utilizing the computers as designers as opposed to learners, but I have my doubts that mindtools would engage students differently compared to other active/engaged learning methods such as cooperative learning. Some of their examples of mindtools such as databases and concept mapping software are not exclusive to computers because students could very well construct the same knowledge with the use of the basic paper and pencil.

Mindtools may be effective but I feel their effectiveness is dependent on the learner’s motivation to use these tools. I have trouble imagining school children being excited about entering data in a content database and using it to analyze and organize the data. There is however one form of entertainment that has captured the attention of young and old alike: the computer and video games. In a study by Dickey (2005), she compared the engagement strategies in popular computer and video games and the characteristics of engaged learning. With that, she examined how these game designs may be used to inform instructional design. Perhaps one day technology would allow students to design their own video games that are both engaging and educational.

References

Dickey, M.D. (2005). Engaging by design: How engagement strategies in popular computer and video games can form instructional design. Educational Technology, Research and Development, 53, 67-83.

Jonassen, D.H., Carr, C., & Yueh, H. (1998). Computers as mindtools for engaging learners in critical thinking. TechTrends, 43, 24-32.

Flower-ology!

While the study of learning has dropped off the radar for many years, recently there has been a renew interest in this field (Papert, 1993; Siegler, 2000). Siegler (2000) summarized these four consistent findings on learning that emerged through microgenetic studies: a) change is gradual, b) discoveries follow success as well as failure, c) early variability is related to later learning, and d) discoveries are constrained by conceptual understanding. I observed the four findings by Siegler in Papert's description of his learning experiences in the study of flowers:

Change is gradual. It took Papert several years to become familiarize with the many flowers he regularly came in contact with. At first he was using strategies that he was taught in school, but slowly he learned to make etymology connections, which was an effective strategy for him.

Discoveries follow success as well as failures. This is obvious for Papert as he discovered new strategies after previous strategies failed to make the necessary connection that he needed. He also began to finely hone these new strategies.

Early variability is related to later learning. Papert took the time to learn about flowers and in the beginning he used many different strategies to help him learn. Due to his persistence, that involved abandoning ineffective strategies and adopting new useful strategies, his learning increased.

Discoveries are constrained by conceptual understanding. The strategies that Papert used may not make sense if he did not have the conceptual understanding of the subject matter. If he had developed a faulty conceptual understanding that the name of the flower must directly relate to the shape of the flower, he would have a tough time trying to make the connections later on.

The first time I read Papert’s description of his learning experiences it did not make any impression on me. But when I think of my own learning experiences, I find that it is not easy to describe these experiences. It would take a lot of thinking and even then, my description would not have been as fluent. And it is then that I began to appreciate the article and realized that I have yet to fully understand how I learn or even take the time to reflect on my learning experiences.

References

Papert, S. (1993). The Children's Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. New York: BasicBooks.

Siegler, R.S. (2000). The rebirth of children’s learning. Child Development, 71, 26-35.

Will High-tech kids still think deeply?

High-tech kids will still have the opportunity to think deeply. While new technology has pushed every aspects of life to an incredibly fast pace, I still believe that there is a lot of room for critical thinking. In many ways, technology has provided the motivation and the means. Alvermann and Heron (2001) shared a story about an adolescent, Robert, who spent many hours at the public library, using the internet, to read about the Japanese animé Dragon Ball Z. Robert and his friend also had discussions analyzing DBZ characters, predicting upcoming plots, and researching multiple sources of information. However, when asked, Robert said he was not interested in reading. Robert has also been labeled by his school as being at risk of dropping out of school due to low reading achievement. In this case, Robert was practicing many critical literacy skills, but just not in a classroom or with school materials.

Tarlow and Spangler (2001) stated that the quick pace of a movie or audiotape may not allow a person to reflect deeply about the message while one may have more opportunities to think critically while reading and writing. I feel that there exist a huge element of motivation when it comes to critical thinking. For Robert, the motivation for him was the availability of the information in the subject matter that he loves on the Internet. For others, the thrill of looking at the number of hits on their website or weblog is enough to motivate them to write more and write critically.

On the side, it is ironic that sometimes in the place where critical thinking and writing is required, the joy of reading and writing is lost. A fellow student once commented that she used to love reading until she entered graduate school!

References

Alvermann, D.E. & Heron, A.H. (2001). Literacy identity work: Playing to learn with popular media. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 45, 118-122.

Tarlow, M. & Spangler, K.L. (2001). Now more than ever: Will high-tech kids still think deeply? The Education Digest, 67, 23-27.