Our public school system used to have a monopoly on information and learning. However, access to technology has changed that paradigm. Now, teachers are no longer the gate-keepers of information, because students can access far more knowledge than any educator has with a few clicks of the mouse...or touches of the screen. Richardson argues that even though this access to teachers, learning and information is the new reality, public schools have stubbornly held on to their traditional structures for learning, which were developed in a different time to accomplish a different means.
Richardson stated,
If the primary goal for school remains educating our children well enough to "pass the test," getting them all to consume the "right" content and store the "right" answers, there will soon be better ways to do that than by sending our kids to school.
Whether we adults see it or not, my son, your daughter, our kids aren't waiting any longer for someone to tell them what to learn.As schools learn to adjust to this new paradigm for learning, Richardson stated there are two different directions this change could take. The first is to use technology to do what we are currently doing "better." In other words, "let's deliver the old curriculum through new tools." The second is to use technology to do things "differently", which includes changing the roles of teachers and classrooms. The second approach is necessary for our public schools to remain relevant in the face of teachers and information no longer being a scarce resource.
In the second approach to change
The emphasis shifts from content mastery to learning mastery. That means students have more ownership over their own learning, using their access to knowledge and teachers to create their own unique paths to the outcomes we, and they, deem important.
...assessments focus less on what student know, and more on what they can do with what they know.
Developing creativity, persistence, and the skills for patient problem solving, B.S.-detecting, and collaborating may now be more important than knowing the key dates and battles of the Civil War (after all, those answers are just a few taps on our phones away...In this new world, where "curriculum is everywhere", how will our public schools stay relevant? How will our public schools, which were developed to prepare kids to work in factories, adapt to this new paradigm where knowledge and teachers are no longer scarce? That is the challenge we educators face, because failure to adapt will cause parents to start asking "Why School?"
Interesting. I'm curious. What does Richardson see as the role of today's high stakes testing and teacher evaluation situation? In other words, how does he conceptualize and comport his new paradigm with the fact that, currently, our livelihoods our based on the ability of our students to "pass the test", "consume the right content", and "store the right answers".
ReplyDeleteGreg Wills
English Department Leader
Coal City High School
In reading most of his work, and following his Twitter account, I am confident in saying that Richardson is not a supporter of high stakes testing and using such testing results in teacher evaluations. I don't think he blames educators as much as the "system" for the current paradigm.
ReplyDeleteSo what kind of accountability system does he advocate for both students and teachers? Is the first step changing the way we assess, morphing from a format of testing what kids know to a format of assessing what kids can do? What would an assessment system in that paradigm look like in light of the individualization of learning that would undoubtedly come from that idea? How could we standardize assessment in such a paradigm, or would we even want to do so? Could we feasibly "test the masses" in such a system, and how could that testing possibly be fair to the individual learning of all students? Sorry for all the questions, and I guess I am thinking aloud here more than actually asking questions, but it seems that the proliferation of technology and the ready access of information has brought us to a crossroads in education, and there currently exists an incongruence of where many people believe we should go and the systems that are now in place that seriously hinder the ability to go there. Thanks for sharing. I always enjoy these discussions.
ReplyDeleteGreg Wills
English Department Leader
Coal City High School
Your questions are many of the same ones Richardson addresses in his book. His position is that our assessments have to stop measuring what kids know and start measuring what they can do with what they know. I think everyone would agree that there is a basic set of knowledge that students have to attain to function in our democratic society. Therefore, assessments should be able to determine proficiency at these basic skills. However, Richardson stated that at least some of our assessments should "advance to open-network tests that measure not just if kids answer a question well, but how literate they are at discerning good information from bad and tapping into the experts and networks that can inform those answers." Also, he advocates for "performance-based" assessments where students have to do something with what they know to show mastery. Obviously, creating and scoring such assessments is much more challenging than developing and scoring a multiple-choice test. Even more challenging is getting our legislators and "corporate education reformers" to understand and appreciate the value of such an approach.
ReplyDelete