I watched a Ted-Talk recently where the speaker addressed innovation in education. The focus of the talk was on a proposed solution to the problems in education. It boiled down to a lack of innovation in education. The speaker correctly pointed out that classrooms in the US have not substantially changed in a century. In talks that I have done, I often make the same point. I show a slide of an operating room from the early 1950’s and then a slide of one in this Century. The changes are breathtaking. In comparison I then show a slide of a 19th century classroom followed by a typical classroom today. In the latter slide the desks lack inkwells, but the rows, as well as most of the surroundings remain the same. The impact of those pictures causes laughter from educators, which seemed to come from recognition, embarrassment, nervousness, frustration and resignation that this indefensible condition is not changing any time soon.
The Ted-Talk speaker went on to suggest that a solution would be to bring into the education system more individuals with less of an education background to present and introduce more innovation. She also pointed to what she referred to as the successes of Teach for America in doing just that. Of course the successes and failures of Teach for America would be the stuff of another post, so I will not enter that quagmire here. My objection to the speaker’s position is that we need not bring in outside innovators to the education system in order to insure innovation. Educators are among the smartest and most educated people in America. Many educators are natural innovators. The success of many educators is a direct result of their innovation in the classroom. It is not for lack of innovators that the system has not sufficiently evolved over the Centuries to adjust and remain relevant; it is the system itself that limits change.
As I speak to many new teachers around the country about their teacher preparation, I am struck by how underprepared many of these kids were when they were sent out to seek employment. It almost seems that the plan is to teach the same basic pedagogy and methodology to be used within a walled classroom that has been employed over the centuries. The hope seems to be that when the student gets a job, his/her employer will mold them into master teachers. To an extent that is true, because the culture of any school or district has a great influence over the development of a young teacher. Schools with effective mentorship programs have a very positive effect.
Often however, those school cultures are steeped in traditions. The long-standing position is usually: this is the way we have always done it, so we will continue to do so. I have seen many pre-service teachers held back from implementing new proven innovative lessons just because it had never been done in that school before and people feared possible consequences. That is not a culture open to any innovator. Compliance is also a big part of many school cultures. Students must be compliant to the teacher, and teachers must be compliant to the administrators, and the head administrator must be compliant to the board. So it is written, and so it shall be done! This is hardly an atmosphere for any innovation to be successful wherever the innovator comes from.
In the history of charter schools they were supposed to be incubators for innovation. The reason charters were exempt from so many mandates, rules, and requirements was to allow innovation to flourish. Of course innovation takes time and time is money, so given the choice between profits or innovation the bottom line must produce a profit. It is just business. So much for Charter school innovation.
Teachers themselves are not blameless in this system of stagnation. Too many are comfortable with what they are doing and how they are doing it. Innovation requires people to leave their areas of comfort. Many hold to these comfort zones even at the expense of the education of their students. If the ways of old were good enough for the teacher, they should be good enough for the student. The focus of teaching kids to live in their world moving forward to their future is lost to accommodate teachers comfortable with their own past. No, this is not true of all teachers, but it should not be the position of any teacher or administrator.
Now we come to standardization. That in itself suggests that innovation has little place in a system that is trying to get everyone on the same page. Of course innovation can address that and it would probably help educators reach their goals more effectively and efficiently if it were supported. The standardized tests however that are a mandated result of standardization are used to force teachers to comply with the tried and true methods of test preparation at the expense of time for any innovation. To insure that teachers adhere to the testing priorities, someone decided to tie teacher evaluations to student performance on standardized tests. That “advance in education” was not innovation’s finest hour. Again, this is yet another counter-productive move in support of innovation in education.
When it comes to innovation in education, there are many educators who have great ideas that could effectively change the “what” and “how” of learning. Many teachers are well aware of the myths of education that are so blindly believed and supported by non-educators, as well as those in control of the system. To effectively innovate in an antiquated system, we do not need outside innovators, but rather our own educated innovative educators to enter the discussion of education. We need a system that not only asks for innovation, but one that welcomes and supports it. We must change the culture before we change the system or it will not matter whom we go to in order to find innovation for relevant education.
Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category
Innovation vs. Compliance in Education
Posted in Uncategorized on December 17, 2014| 7 Comments »
Trying to make sense of a senseless act.
Posted in Uncategorized on December 14, 2012| 16 Comments »
This is probably the wrong time to sit down and address what has just happened at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. All of the details are not yet out, but the news media has made many statements and assumptions that seem to hold up myths about schools that we continue to hear each time another of this growing number of horrendous incidents explodes on the TV screen. Reporters continue to ask the question, “Were all of the security and safety measures in place and adhered to?”
Here is a fact: Video cameras, Buzzers on doors, People sitting at desks in the hallways of schools, even metal detectors are not security against an armed attacker. The people maintaining these items could very well be the first victims of the assault. These measures and methods taken by schools are to give an illusion of safety to caring parents and teachers. It is an assurance that schools are seemingly doing something to protect children. None of these measures however, protect children from an armed intruder bent on killing as many people as possible in the shortest amount of time. In terms of schools, we must understand the people we refer to are children.
In my lifetime these tragic attacks have occurred at the college, high school, middle school and now at the elementary school level. Most recently, they also occurred at a movie theater shopping mall and a political open air, town hall gathering complete with a congresswoman. After each of those incidents the idea of discussion about the problem for some reason had to be put off for a few months before we could talk about it. I did not understand it then, and I do not understand it now. We need to see this as a problem. We can’t wait until we add a pre-school, or a maternity ward to the long and growing list of places where kids are being killed. This incident is now listed as number 5 in the Top school shootings. What civilized, educated country has a list like that? How long is that list?
The Terrorists of 911 have changed how we all travel today. Measures are taken to prevent weapons being taken aboard planes. Yes we are inconvenienced and many of us complain every time we go through those long lines. We comply, because it is reasonable, and it insures our right and freedom to travel. One imbecilic terrorist made an unsuccessful attempt to use a shoe bomb and today, and every day, any American boarding a plane takes off his/her shoes. We all complain about that, but it is a reasonable sacrifice for safety. The cost of us learning this lesson of reasonableness about safety and security in the air came at a huge price to our country. It took well over 3,000 lives in NYC, Pennsylvania, and Washington D.C.
What is the total number of dead children that we need to get to before we can begin discussions to change what we are doing now? Obviously, what we are doing is not working. We need to have a discussion based on facts and not rhetoric. Too many of the facts about guns and their control have been distorted by too many people and a few organizations, well healed with the ability to put out misinformation and propaganda. We need critical thinking skills to sort through all of the BS. We need honesty, clarity and focus. We cannot start from a position stating that “nothing can be done”. If we ask, how do we prevent another incident where 20 children, ages 5-10, and 8 adults being killed in an elementary school in a matter of minutes. How can an educated civilized culture accept that “nothing can be done” as an answer? If the solution doesn’t begin NOW with US, when will it begin? Is there an actual number of dead children that is a tipping point? More importantly, are my kids going to be in that number? Are yours?
I believe in the constitution, and I believe in the Second amendment. I believe that citizens have the right too own guns. I also believe that right comes with a very big responsibility. Not everyone is responsible. Not everyone is mentally stable enough to be held responsible. I believe that we can regulate guns with commonsense laws in consideration of the facts, and not the rhetoric. I believe that reasonable people can look at real facts and come to reasonable conclusions that can lead to reasonable controls. The process however must begin with discussion. That almost never happens after these horrific events. There will be blog posts like this, editorials, documentaries, and maybe a “60 Minutes” segment, but probably no real substantive, focused meaningful discussion to protect kids will ever take place in the political arena. Politicians need to put the right to life for our kids first. The discussions will move to protect the rights of people who may not capable of responsibility to hold in their hands the lives of our children. If not now, when? If not us, who?
19th, 20th & 21st, Century Education
Posted in Uncategorized on February 2, 2012| 14 Comments »
A personal observation: Back when I began my early education, the year was 1952. I don’t believe Pre-K even existed back then, so I started my education in Kindergarten. There is no doubt in my mind that in my early education I was exposed to educators who were students of a 19th Century education. Those teachers were teaching content to kids using methods they had learned in the 1800’s. Content back then was more solid and more trustworthy. Things did not change. Encyclopedias, the source of information back then, were very dependable. Encyclopedias were infrequently updated by today’s standards. I think the update cycle was about every six years. Yearbook editions filled in the gaps each year and they usually came out the year after the date of the title. It took at least a year to print, so content was dated on the first day any encyclopedia was opened, so relevance was never an issue. Even the news cycle was slow-paced. Newspapers and magazines had to wait at least 24 hours before they could address any change or present anything new.
The pace for 19th Century educators preparing kids for the 20th Century was much slower. It was easy to address change because teachers had time to absorb change and mull it over before they had to present it. Change had the luxury of being able to be pondered before acceptance. There was no rush. . As long as things in the system worked, we continued to do the same things over and over.
The concept of changing things came when the Russians put up Sputnik. For those who were not around then,that was the first satellite in space. That was when Americans began to ask, “How did this happen?” That was when Americans needed to play catch-up to be relevant. Before Sputnik, we were content with teaching from behind. We were fine with our education system. The system served us well until there was a competition. That is when that American competitive spirit kicked into gear and we were in the “Space Race” with the Russians.
It was time to move out the 19th Century ways, and race to the 20th Century, even though we were over 50 years into it. We ramped things up, and even relevance was not enough; we needed to go beyond relevance to innovation. A mere satellite was not enough, we needed a solid win with a moon landing. The benefits were enormous with Velcro, Tang, and Dried Ice Cream, as well as the NASA space program. Education was now in the 20th Century and we were never going back.
Once the Space Race was over, and we declared ourselves the winners, things began to slow down again. Educators settled in. Innovation was replaced by relevance, but that soon was overtaken by complacency. As long as things in the system worked, we continued to do the same things over and over. Technology, however, had again reared its ugly head. It comes not in the form of a basketball-shaped object hurtling through space, but in the form of digital information and content that dwarfs the total collection of ALL previously printed tomes of knowledge combined. As they were in the late 50’s, educators, the complacent content providers, are again caught with their pants down.
Again, we needed to call upon the competitive spirit of Americans in order to shake off the shackles of complacency. We needed another Space Race. We need some real competition to get educators beyond relevance and into innovation once again. If there is no real competition, we can make one up. We can use education itself as the motivator. We can put educators competing with other educators from around the world to see who will be at the top. That will drive the call to shake off the ways of the 20th Century and teach for the 21st Century even though we are more than a decade into it.
This “Race to the Top” and teaching for the 21st Century are only slogans. They are designed to be reminiscent of “The Race for Space” and “Teaching for the 20th Century”. That harkens to a time when educators were able to change things up, but it was a different era. We don’t compare modes of transportation from the 20th century to those capabilities of transportation today. A DC 6 airplane cannot be compared to a 747 Jetliner. Why would we expect motivations of the 50’s and 60’s to work today? Slogans and contrived competitions are poor substitutes for relevant professional development.
We can’t expect to teach kids for the 21st century today, because we are over a decade too late. We can’t expect to teach kids for the 21st century with educators in an education system steeped in methods of the 20th Century. We can’t expect to teach kids for the 21st Century with a majority of an educational infrastructure built between 1850 and 1950.
We can expect positive change, if we address these very real issues. We don’t need to teach for the future, we need to concentrate on today, and that requires relevance. Relevance requires continuous development for everyone. Before we can expect innovation, we all have to be on board with relevance. That will require a commitment to professional development. We can’t expect students to be relevant when their teachers are not. We can’t expect skills to be relevant, if the tools for those skills are not. Our culture strives for relevance at every turn except in education. Businesses pay top dollar to be and stay relevant. Relevance is the key to what we have called a modern society.
There is no way for educators who are among the most educated people in our society to stay relevant without continuously learning. It cannot be expected to happen on its own. Learning is not a passive endeavor. Teachers must be professionally developed continually over the course of their careers. It must be part of their work week. It requires a commitment on the part of the schools to provide it, and the teachers to do it. People need to be not only professionally developed, but supported in their efforts to be relevant, in order to move on to innovation. Let’s not teach for a century, but rather teach for now, and the ability to continually learn and adapt. We need our people, adults and children to be able to deal with any century moving forward.
Complete Link List of #140EDU Conference Videos
Posted in Uncategorized on August 19, 2011| 7 Comments »
This is the listing of all of the videos from #140EDU Conference. Please feel free to share these videos with your friends and colleagues:
Chris Lehmann – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-welcome-5465616
Jeff Pulver – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-welcome-5465616
Jack Hidary – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-jack-hidary-5475010
David Singer – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-david-singer-louis-wool-5465907
Louis Wool – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-david-singer-louis-wool-5465907
Rebecca Levey – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-rebecca-levey-5465920
Christian Long – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-christian-long-5465962
Steven Anderson – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-steven-anderson-tom-whitby-5469136
Tom Whitby – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-steven-anderson-tom-whitby-5469136
Lisa Nielsen – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-lisa-nielsen-5474229
Inga Ros – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-inga-r%C3%B3s-5474278
Patrick Higgins – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-patrick-higgins-5469157
Cynthia Lawson Jaramillo – http://blip.tv/140confevents/cynthia-lawson-5469188
Mel Rosenberg – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-mel-rosenberg-5469255
Jerome McLeaod – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-panel-growing-up-in-real-time-5475039
Danielle Duncan – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-panel-growing-up-in-real-time-5475039
Joshua Hendarto – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-panel-growing-up-in-real-time-5475039
Daniellee Villa – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-panel-growing-up-in-real-time-5475039
Maya Wright – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-panel-growing-up-in-real-time-5475039
George Haines – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-george-haines-5469357
Don Burton – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-don-burton-5469338
Katie McFarland – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-katie-mcfarland-5469369
Barry Joseph – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-barry-joseph-5469388
Marc Ecko – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-marc-ecko-5469424
Anthony Stover – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-parents-panel-parents-of-sla-5469471
Janos Marton – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-janos-marton-5469496
Michele Haiken – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-michele-haiken-5469532
Adam Bellow – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-adam-bellow-5469551
Shelley Krause – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-shelly-krause-5474324
Michael Federochko – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-shelly-krause-5474324
Niki Kakarla – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-shelly-krause-5474324
Perry Hewitt – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-perry-hewitt-5474355
Andrea Genevieve Michnik – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-andrea-michnik-5469595
Will Craig – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-will-craig-5469623
Dale Stephens – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-dale-stephens-5469901
Barry Schuler – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-barry-schuler-5469972
Lynn Langit – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-lynn-langit-5474396
Samantha Langit – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-samantha-langit-5474378
Eric Sheninger – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-eric-sheninger-5469999
Tal Horowitz – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-tali-horowitz-5470009
Tom Krieglstein – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-tom-krieglstein-5470025
Gina Johnston – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-gina-johnston-5474416
Kim Sivick – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-kim-sivick-5470043
Wendy Brawer – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-wendy-brawer-5470079
Dr.Green – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-panel-alternatives-to-an-outdated-education-model-5470112
John Mikulski – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-panel-alternatives-to-an-outdated-education-model-5470112
Donna Murdoch – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-panel-alternatives-to-an-outdated-education-model-5470112
Shelly Terrell – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-panel-alternative4
Erik Endress – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-erik-endress-547012
Jane Barratt – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-jane-barratt-5470147
Kyra Gaunt – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-kyra-gaunt-5470171
Mahipal Raythattha – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-mahipal-raythattha-5470860
Deb Eckerling – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-debra-eckerling-5474465
Ethan Bodnar – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-debra-eckerling-5474465
Kristen Durkin – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-debra-eckerling-5474465
Linnea Keys – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-2-11-debra-eckerling-5474465
Kelly Sutton – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-kelly-sutton-5470892
Douglas Crets – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-douglas-crets-5470912
Michael Karnjanaprakorn – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-mike-karnjanaprakorn-5470958
Karen Blumberg – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-panel-educators-taking-control-of-their-own-professional-development-the-edcamp-model-5471079
Ann Leaness – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-panel-educators-taking-control-of-their-own-professional-development-the-edcamp-model-5471079
Meenoo Rami – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-panel-educators-taking-control-of-their-own-professional-development-the-edcamp-model-5471079
Gregory Corbin – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-gregory-corbin-5471120
Randee Schneeberg–Pomerantz – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-randee-schneeberg-5471136
Michael Margolis – http://blip.tv/140confevents/140edu-8-3-11-michael-margolis-5474488
2010 in review
Posted in Uncategorized on January 2, 2011| 1 Comment »
The stats helper monkeys at WordPress.com mulled over how this blog did in 2010, and here’s a high level summary of its overall blog health:

The Blog-Health-o-Meter™ reads Wow.
Crunchy numbers
About 3 million people visit the Taj Mahal every year. This blog was viewed about 30,000 times in 2010. If it were the Taj Mahal, it would take about 4 days for that many people to see it.
In 2010, there were 48 new posts, not bad for the first year! There were 17 pictures uploaded, taking up a total of 953kb. That’s about a picture per month.
The busiest day of the year was January 15th with 485 views. The most popular post that day was My First Post on My Own Blog.
Where did they come from?
The top referring sites in 2010 were twitter.com, iconfactory.com, hootsuite.com, facebook.com, and refzip.com.
Some visitors came searching, mostly for illegitimi non carborundum, my island view, tom whitby, tom whitby blog, and lack of discipline.
Attractions in 2010
These are the posts and pages that got the most views in 2010.
My First Post on My Own Blog January 2010
44 comments
A Modest Blog Proposal September 2010
53 comments and 7 Likes on WordPress.com
About Me January 2010
Twitter’s Achilles Heel September 2010
40 comments
Lack of Discipline August 2010
11 comments
The Old West.
Posted in Education, Reform, Teched, Technology, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on February 1, 2010| 10 Comments »
Back in the late 50’s one of my favorite shows was Wyatt Earp, starring Hugh O’Brien. Wyatt Earp carried a gun called the “Buntline Special”. It was a gun designed by Ned Buntline a journalist, who designed a pistol with an extra long barrel. As an adult, I realized that it must have been barrel envy that prompted so many gunfights with Wyatt.
The one Law that Wyatt insisted on in the old west town of Tombstone Arizona, was “No Guns Allowed”. Firearm technology had advanced so much that the Colt .45 was a weapon that had to be restricted. There were laws to protect citizens, but Wyatt thought it to be easier to collect all firearms as the men (women played no significant part in TV westerns) entered the town. It was a pain in the neck but way easier than dealing with those cowpokes using their guns. As the song went on Wyatt Earp, Wyatt Earp, Brave, Courageous, and Bold. Wyatt Earp, Wyatt Earp, long may his story be told.Fifty years later I am still telling the story.
Moving ahead in the space-time continuum I found myself visiting the 1964 world’s fair in Flushing, New York. You may remember the site of the Fair as it was imortalized in the movie Men in Black. That fair was about the Future. Most of the pavilions hosted exhibits telling of what life would be like in the 21st Century. They promised Flying Cars, my favorite prediction. Many of the exhibits talked about the Technology of the future and how kids would learn using Technology. I do not remember the specifics since that was so many years ago, but I loved future predictions like: Someday kids will have powerful computers the size of a deck of cards. These computers will be able to seek out and deliver information in various forms to these kids. They would be able to exchange ideas and collaborate globally. Back in 1964 that would have been a radical concept way beyond anything in existence.
Shortly after that World’s Fair, we landed men on the Moon. Amazingly, many of those World’s Fair predictions have come true. I am still waiting for those Flying cars. Now we move closer to the 21st Century. No more of the Old West is left. Technology has moved at a rapid pace since that Fair. Kids carry in their pockets computers that are more powerful than those used to place men on the moon. Students may use these computers for all that was predicted. For an educator it is beyond imagination to have students equipped with the ability to access information pertinent to learning at any time. These tools of technology go way beyond anything really imagined from the 60’s.
Now I need to tie things together so that this all makes sense. In many districts across the land we have educational leaders who see themselves as Wyatt Earp. They have discipline policies in place. Every class has rules generated by the teacher, or collaboratively agreed upon by the class itself. There are established consequences for inappropriate actions. With all of this in place educators are not inclined to enforce their own discipline policies. NO CELLPHONES ALLOWED. This is not the wild west. Whatever happened to Brave , Courageous and Bold?
If a kid is using a cellphone in class, a teacher needs to do two things. First enforce the rule addressing inappropriate behavior in class. Second, reflect on why a student finds more engagement in cellphone use than engagement in the lesson for the day! As educators we are the adults in the room. We need to Guide our students to appropriate behavior. In addition we need to model appropriate behavior. There are many teachers using their cellphones at inappropriate times.
We are dealing with many issues that did not exist even a few years ago. We need to proceed using common sense and focus on what is needed to promote and support Learning. Our students are not indentured servants. We have to guide them with the same respect we expect from them. I can only hope that a short time from now we will look back on these wild west policies of leaving cellphones at the door and ask, “What the hell were we thinking?’ Let us strive to harness the power of these very personal computers and have our students use them to engage in learning, and save its other functions for more appropriate times. While we are at it let’s direct students to use technology for speeding along the invention and implementation of flying cars. My selfish request.
In My Humble Opinion
Posted in Administrator, Assessment, Education, Leadership, Literacy, Thought leadership, Thought Provoking, Uncategorized on January 22, 2010| 22 Comments »
I am beginning to appreciate this blogging thing more with each post I write. What I like best is that these are my ideas and have no effect on anyone except those who choose to accept them. Readers even get to pick and choose which of my ideas they want. I will never know what effect they will have, but I do get to read the comments, and for the most part they are positive. I appreciate the comments that are even more thoughtful than my original post. That being said, I can now post something that some will find upsetting . If you are in that group by the end of the post, come back to this first paragraph and remind yourself of this opening statement. It may have more meaning for you the second time.
Through my entire career in education I have seen plans that were supposed to revolutionize the educational system, the latest attempt being “No Child Left Behind”. Now with this new administration we are looking at merit pay for teachers. A plan flawed in its conception with a great potential to fail and once again target teachers as the reason for failure. I am putting an IMHO here to quell the stirring beasts who are about to pounce on the reply box.
As a teacher of teachers I always instruct my students to have an objective or a goal for every lesson they teach. Their purpose is to focus their thoughts, direction, and energy to accomplish that goal. Most importantly however, they are to assess their students along the way to make adjustments in order to complete the goal.
If we apply that same principle to our educational system, I would expect a positive result. All we have to do is ask the question, “What is the goal of education?” You have to see where this is going by now. The problem is who will answer that question: Politician, Parent, Administrator, Teacher, Student, Tax-payer, or that non-educator sitting on the educational advisory panel? The answers will muddy what should be a clear answer.
Here comes the IMHO again. As far as I can tell, the goal of education is to provide workers for the job force. That seems to be the driving force in everyone’s perception of education in America and probably elsewhere. Before you scroll to the reply box, finish the post. I might say something else to set you off. Employment seems to me, to be the Goal of education. Some might say the goal is to get the student to college. Moving a student to Higher Ed, it is just a hand-off to the college to prepare a student for higher paying employment. Colleges are ruled by the same goal.
The problem with all of this is that when the goal of employment is reached the perception of many is that the need for education, and learning has ended. That is true for many individuals no matter what line of work or whatever profession they enter. That most definitely includes ALL of the professionals in education. Once they get their job there is no longer a need to learn. We have even coined a phrase for those who are exceptions. We call them Life-Long Learners. Those are the people who did not buy into the education- culminates-with-employment idea.
If the goal for Education is employment and a student becomes employed, the goal has been attained. There is no need for continued learning. We have succeeded. If however, that is not the outcome we want, maybe we should go back to the beginning. Let us look at the Goal for which we must focus our thoughts, direction, and energy to accomplish. Maybe it needs tweaking, or clarification, or assessing, or a complete change. As an educator I have to throw all that in, even though IMHO the goal sucks and should be scraped.
It may be time to establish a Goal we can all agree upon. Here is my contribution or the point I would like to make with this discussion. My Goal would be to promote Learning and Literacy through education. “We do that”, you say. If we did, why do so many people stop learning and being literate once they get a job?
At one time people needed to spend time reading books and engaging in conversation and debate and collaboration. It was difficult to do when there was no time or place to do this after one graduated. After all, the goal was attained and there was no need. The Internet has changed all that.
If Administrators made their decisions on whether or not something promotes and supports literacy and learning, many decisions for financing, curriculum, and staffing might be different. If principals had that as a goal, School policies, support of teachers, professional development and even interaction with parents might be more purposeful. Teachers, many who will claim this to be their goal, will be more open to accepting new ideas and new tools for preparing kids to learn beyond the classroom. A skill they will need if we meet the goal of learning and literacy.
Employment and supplying a workforce should not be the goal of educators. That is the stuff of politics. Let the need to continually learn and communicate in a literate manner be the Goal of All educators. All decisions should be weighed with this in mind. All assessments should address this goal. We would need no standardized tests with this as a standardized Goal. IMHO.
Now you can return to my first paragraph and then scroll to the Reply box and leave your comment. I hope my humble opinion has given you pause to reflect.











