As I was picking up my Hawaiian shirts from my local dry cleaners last week, I was approached by a former student of 30 years ago, who managed to recognize me all these years and extra pounds later. He mentioned a few of the memories that he had of our student/teacher time together and then offered his view of education today. It was soon apparent that he felt that at least half of the entire student population in America was graduating school with a total inability to read anything. He stated and restated his very firm belief several times during our brief conversation. It was apparent to me that changing his mind would not take place at that moment in that parking lot, so I headed off with a simple disagreement, but not really challenging his view of education.
This encounter caused me to start thinking about other perspectives people might have on education today. I travel extensively in education circles and engage people in conversation about education on a regular basis. I am starting to believe that when it comes to what people believe, or don’t believe about education has little to do with facts. It seems to be more about who has the ear of the public in order to say things loud enough and often enough regardless of facts. Sound bites seem to be framing the education discussion in terms of taxpayer perceptions. Politicians and Tax Reformers seem to be the loudest and most persistent voices in the discussion.
I then attended the Education Industry Summit held by the Software and Information Industry Association (www.siia.net/education). It is the premiere conference for leaders in the education technology industry. This organization sponsors, encourages, and mentors companies that are education technology innovators. It is by all means an excellent organization.
My personal takeaway from this conference however, was a glimpse of how the perspective on education is viewed by the people in this industry. They are constantly surrounded by tech, so they view all education in terms of technology. They are rich with facts to support their beliefs. They talk about the impact their products will have on a technology-rich environment in education. They have charts and diagrams in PowerPoint presentations, as well as professionally produced videos to support their product’s entry and impact into the world of education.
What vexed me about this perspective was that I did not recognize the education system that they described in a majority of their presentations.
There are many schools with a culture that supports technology and innovation, but I question whether it is a majority of schools. Technology in education has been introduced in bits and pieces as it developed. Few schools had systematic plans for integration. Many were required to have what were called five-year plans, but five years in technology is a lifetime. Dog years don’t even come close. Many schools are playing catch up in this age of technology. Integrating new tech-driven methodology into a system steeped in 19th and 20th century methodology is not going to be accomplished overnight, or in some cases over a decade. We have many schools trying to teach their kids for the future while relying on methods and technologies of the past. Too many schools do not have the mindset or culture to support systematic conversions to the latest and greatest innovations of technology. These points are not being made in power point presentations, or professional videos of the industry people. They discuss the impact of their technology on students, but ignore the impact on teachers.
One would think that educators would have the best perspective on a view of education and many do. Their view however is determined by their teaching experience. There is a vast difference in perspective when talking to an urban teacher as opposed to a suburban teacher. Rural teachers have a completely different view. There is a big difference between schools of poverty and schools of affluence. How can we ever address the solutions to the problems in a standardized way when the problems are so diverse? How can we have a national discussion on education when the problems for the most part exist on a local level? How do we listen to politicians, profiteers, tax reformers, education reformers parents, students, teachers, administrators, and concerned citizens while each has a different motivation and view of education? Should each of their views carry the same weight? Will it ever be possible to find common ground between the likes of Diane Ravitch and the likes of Michelle Rhee?
Before we decide on the changes maybe we should reconsider the needs. Before we went to standardized testing, maybe we should have determined some basic standardized professional development. Maybe in reflecting on how we approach teaching on a national level, we could be less concerned with what we teach. The emphasis might go from what kids learn to how kids learn. If the national focus was on creating learners instead of test takers, we might make a more effective difference. If our educators rededicated themselves to learning as models and mentors, we might see significant change in a system long in need of updating. It would take a commitment to professional development. It would seem more likely to affect a significant change in our students, if we could first affect a needed change in their educators. Committing to educating educators to the needed changes in methodology and pedagogy as a priority in modern education.
The next time my Hawaiian shirts need to be picked up from the dry cleaners, I should ask my wife if she would please help me out and pick them up.
Excellent post. Reflections when shared brings more people into the conversation. Thank you for sharing your perspective. The people we meet along our travels ….
There can and should be national dialogue on improving attention to effective, deeper learning (I love your phrase, “creating learners instead of test takers”). But changes, addressing the many variations in communities nicely outlined in this post, must occur locally. My guest post in Education week (Peter DeWitt’s “Finding Common Ground” on February 8, 2013) provides information on my concept of Local Education Communities or LECs. State and federal governments should fund the proposals with justification rather than mandate statewide or nationwide changes doomed to failure.
Peter, I like the LEC article. I have thought of starting something like that in my local area but did not know what to call it. Thanks for sharing this blog post. How would you suggest I get started involving others? The direct link to the post is:
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/finding_common_ground/2013/02/local_education_communities.html
Tom, again you have hit a HOME RUN with this post! I wish we had the nerve to STOP THE TESTING and let the teachers go back to making incremental assessments that help the students learn. I favor schools trying to measure outcomes of the students. I think that will be a better indicator of how well we have trained them to be learners and contributing members of society.
I’d suggest that you start with an open-to-all community meeting – to investigate the LEC concept and how it might be done for your community. While of course, teachers, administrators, and students are welcomed, I personally suggest it be “advertised” as a community group – not a school group or community government group (though again, all are welcome). The idea is to take an approach different than either the school or local government would organize, a different / fresh approach. Take the time to build the buyin, don’t minimize the importance of this step. And don’t set a minimum number of participants to start. Share your efforts with the community and others so motivated will join. The key has to be BEING MOTIVATED!!!!
[…] By tomwhitby […]
[…] A Skewed View of EDU. […]
The disconnect between perception and reality is a huge struggle for education. I know that I face this issue when I ever attempt to talk to someone who has no experience in the field about my knowledge from the inside.
Plus, given that we live in such a digital age where soundbytes travel almost at the speed of light, there’s a lot of ways for people to acquire easy-sounding aphorisms about what education ‘is’ or what it ‘needs’ without actually needing to delve into the complexities of the systems.
Suffice it to say that without a profound shift in the way our society approaches not just education, but the definition of learning and intelligence itself, these arguments are going to keep happening, and people are going to continue to assume that things are broken on the whole as opposed to specific, targetable areas of improvement.