21st Century Schizoid Learning

I first encountered the world of education (as a prospective teacher as opposed to a student) some 37 years ago, in 1975, which by chance marked the dawn of the final quarter of the 20th century. It was a time when design and processed-based education was being pioneered. The phrase ‘throw-away society’ had already be coined, and we all knew about the hidden persuasive power of the media and advertising. And because of the oil crisis in the early 1970s there was much talk of the need for conservation and alternative energy, and public collaboration and for greater participation in new design processes. Quite clearly the end was in sight for the then current approach to the industrial society, mass-production and established design-by-drawing methodologies. By the end of the 1970s the impending impact of the computer on our lives was becoming evident too.

So when I come across the phrases ‘21st Century Learning‘ and ‘21st Century Skills‘, I can’t help thinking that what is actually being discussed is ‘late 20th Century Learning and Skills‘. The need for critical evaluation and problem-solving, creativity and innovation, communication and collaboration was clearly identified way back in the last century, but it has taken 37 years for them to start to become more widely identified and accepted (except of course by the present UK government).

Let’s project forward another 37 years then, to 2049. What are the educational needs of someone actually born in the 21st Century? The oldest will be turning 12 this year, and by 2049 will be 49. But unlike the 1960s and 70s when the next 25 years seemed relatively easy to anticipate, there’s now little indication as to how things will be in the future. The only prediction we can perhaps make, based on the fact that technology has clearly entered a highly disruptive phase, is that the next quarter of a century is completely unpredictable.

Thus the so-called ’21st Century Learning and Skills’ might well be hopelessly out-dated and inadequate to deal with living and working in the later years of this century. I suspect (and hope) they will still have some value, but who knows what things will actually be like in the brave new world our current generation of school-children will find themselves?

Perhaps the most important thing we should be focusing on is to ensure the inhabitants of tomorrow’s world are as flexible as possible in their thoughts and actions, well prepared for and accepting of discontinuous change as something normal, and more than willing to take risks and deal with failure. But surely the most important thing of all is to ensure that 21st Century children gain a positive view of education, and the ability to be able to learn for themselves in whatever future they encounter? Sadly, at present, that doesn’t seem to be the case.

Image credit: Photo-Extremist: http://www.flickr.com/photos/thevlue/4839060646

Let them read books…

1001 books you must read before you die. That’s equivalent to about just 10 a year if you live to be 100?

There’s been a lively debate recently about Mr Gove’s suggestion that all children should read 50 books a year. This presents some interesting problems, not the least how the books will be selected, who will pay for them and how each child’s reading will be monitored, and of course, most importantly, assessed. How long will it be before the smartest children simply buy a copy of ’1001 books you must read before you die’, which neatly summarises each one?

http://www.amazon.co.uk/1001-Books-Must-Read-Before/dp/1844034178/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1302461606&sr=1-2

or as one reviewer has put it:

‘you don’t have to actually read all those classic and influential novels, because this superb reference book provides enough information in itself to give the reader an excellent literary overview. With this single volume, you can avoid feeling that you’ve read so much that dying might be a merciful release from all that goddamned literature; instead, each pleasantly brief entry provides enough to grasp the essence of the book in question’.

Meanwhile for the less ambitious, there’s always ’501 must-read’ books. That’s just 5 a year…
http://www.amazon.co.uk/501-Must-Read-Books/dp/0753713438/ref=reg_hu-rd_dp_img

Of course another really good solution might be to equip every child with an iPad-type touch tablet, loaded with the 550 books they are expected to read as they move through school (or 650 if they stay on to the Sixth Form).

And why exactly 50 a year one wonders? According to the Guardian:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/mar/22/gove-50-books-children-laureate
it seems Mr Gove picked up on the idea while visiting the USA, so we can safely assume it’s been worked out as one a week, stupid. Err.. does that mean children are excused from reading a book during Christmas week and Easter week then, or….?

It’s a sad reflection that something that is actually potentially worthwhile ends up being widely ridiculed just because it’s been said by an education minister whose pronouncements can only now be read as a bit of a joke…

“I want to teach the world to learn…”

In my last post I innocently asked one of my famous awkward questions when I queried how we might actually start the learning revolution advocated by Sir Ken Robinson?

It’s true that education has got so far behind the times that a major change is needed, but unless we can imagine school-children, students and teachers rioting in the streets and sending all the Oxbridge-educated politicians and journalists to the guillotine in a bid to achieve a really effective sort of education cut, it’s hard to imagine what other event could possibly act as a catalyst for the revolution.

Instead, somehow we have to find ways to be more sophisticated and strategic, working from within, getting the politicians and the journalists to buy into a simple media message that sounds positive and attractive to Daily Mail readers, and that isn’t going to cost too much to implement.

Now I’ve always considered that learning is a basic survival skill, not that far behind breathing, eating and keeping warm and dry. Children have an instinctive desire to learn, but the problem is that what they are currently being taught is not what they know they need to be learning. There is no longer a fixed body of knowledge that will see them through their lives, and the former holy grail of an academic degree is no longer a guarantee of life-long employment and a good pension.

One of the main problems with education is that as a society we still think of school as being somewhere children go to learn about things, and that’s what is they are then examined on. Perhaps all that’s really needed to achieve something more appropriate is a shift of focus towards an emphasis not so much what you learn, but how you learn? The QCAs ‘Personal Learning and Thinking‘ skills have been around for a few years now, but I doubt whether many teachers are aware of it, and students are certainly not assessed and certificated in things such as being independent enquirers, self-managers and effective participators. Of course a reliable and valid means of ‘on the fly’ collaborative assessment would need to be found to enable students to measure their progress against the learning performance of others, but we all know something that will do just that, don’t we?

Wouldn’t it be great if teachers were encouraged to share and pass on their own expertise in how people learn, instead of keeping it to themselves?

And as an employer in the 21st Century I’d much rather my future workforce had certificates to show that they have the capacity to work collaboratively to acquire the unforeseeable knowledge, understanding and skills that will emerge over their future working lives, rather than having a list of academic qualifications rooted in the incomprehensible suburban sprawl of the ‘just in case’ subject knowledge defined the National Curriculum.

So as a more positive reason for going to school, maybe ‘Learning how to learn‘ is a catchy enough proposition to one day persuade some enlightened and ambitious education minister (sadly not the present incumbent) that here is the basis of a policy that might actually make a difference and also be a potential vote-winner?

Let’s provide some TLC in our schools! That’s: Thinking, Learning and Creativity.

Bring on the learning revolution?

Fed up with the current climate of doom and gloom? Remain unconvinced that nice Mr Gove is going to make a positive difference to the future of education with his Academies? Feel you are the only person who sees the need for major change in schools? If so, then cheer yourself up and hear what Sir Ken Robinson has to say! Sadly though, what he doesn’t explain is exactly how we are going to achieve the learning revolution.

http://www.ted.com/talks/sir_ken_robinson_bring_on_the_revolution.html

And if you’ve never watched it, here’s a previous TED talk he gave in 2006 – though also well worth watching again.

http://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity.html

Just In Case

In my Polyunsaturated facts post I mentioned the concept of Just In Time learning, in which one only learns what one needs when it is specifically needed. Since then I came across this item in which the author interestingly discusses what he calls Just In Case education, referring to the approach in our schools of filling children up with knowledge ‘just in case’ they need it in later life.

Indeed ‘Just In Case’ is a way of life we are used to: “Eat up you lunch just in case you don’t manage to get any supper tonight”; “Buy some extra tins of soup just in case you can’t get to the shops again, or they run out”, etc.

While ‘Just In Case’ is indeed quite a good description of the rationale behind a lot of education provision, the more interesting question is how does the current model need to change to accommodate the world of information snacking?

For starters, we need a ‘must eat to survive’ course which provides everyone with the absolute essentials for life – how to read, write and do basic maths along with some basic communication and creative problem solving skills.

Then on to the main course – a ‘choose what you want and eat as much as you like’ tasty smorgasbord of interesting and unusual wider contextual knowledge and understanding of the way the world works – a general sense of language, geography, history, the science of the universe, logic and creativity, analysis and evaluation, the physical and psychological needs of ourselves and others, attitudes and values, order and chaos, risk and change, learning how to learn, etc. These are not so much pre-cooked stodgy school dinners, but more like delicious, tasty take-aways, individually chosen according to one’s tastes and dietary requirements and the needs of the local community.

And finally for dessert, the icing on the cake – a more in-depth study of a narrow range of ‘subjects’ that reveal the need for detail, accuracy and quality in life and the world of work.

Although this alternative curriculum is described here as a three course meal, there’s no need to consume them in that order or manner. Indeed there are many who suggest that six smaller meals a day is better than three large ones.

So there is no longer any ‘Just In Case’ learning here, but the foundation of a sensible diet that puts information snacking into context, and provides everyone with enough starting questions and potential sources of information to explore when the time comes.

Polyunsaturated facts

Warning: this post may contain traces of disturbing words and sentences that are unsuitable for those who are allergic to change in education.

During the week I came across this blog post on Info-snacks, which made an interesting analogy between the intake of information and food. Essentially the author suggests that the increasing online availability of small chunks of easily digestible facts and figures is potentially at the expense of a series of ‘proper meals’ that form part of a ‘sensible diet’. Now I’m the first to admit that being able to rapidly search for and discover some fascinating fact can be surprisingly satisfying, possibly even more so than eating a Cadbury’s Chocolate Egg, and for substantially much less effort than having to sit down for months on end consuming a course in some rich, over-egged esoteric academic banquet and facing the prospect of an examination at the end in order to gain a certificate that will probably mark me as ‘over-weight’ to most prospective employers.

With the rapidly increasing range of easily available motivational Scoobie Snacks such as blogs, posts and a variety of Pick’n'Mix tweets it seems almost inevitable that the young will start to opt for info-bites rather than a desire to acquire an in-depth knowledge and understanding.

At the same time, in a related post, comes the suggestion of something called ‘Just In Time’ learning. In industry Just In Time (or JIT) is a management tool for cutting costs through setting up efficient work-flow processes, so that components for the assembly line through to deliveries to the consumer arrive exactly when needed. In a similar way, JIT learning would presumably deliver exactly the right information to you on your hand-held device at the right place at the right time. Knowledge becomes something that is provided on a strictly need-to-know basis.

What the anticipated growth in Info-snacks and JIT learning have in common is that they both question the established approach that knowledge and understanding of the world is something to be bulk force-fed and absorbed in one’s school and college days. Unless we change our approach to formal academic education courses, learners will increasingly turn to rejecting traditional forms of learning in favour of readily available, easily digestible, instantly forgettable fast-facts. And, as with the need for more healthy eating, it’s not a simple matter of ‘banning’ crisps and fizzy drinks, it’s about educating people how to develop good learning habits and to only consume high-fact information snacks in moderation. Remember everyone: ‘Information snacks between meals can spoil your appetite for real learning?’ There are times when a quick snack is appropriate to keep you going, and times when you need to sit down to a proper meal.

However, there’s one aspect of information snacking that has not so far been mentioned. Just as eating is essentially a social as well as nutritional occasion, so is learning. And it may just be that if these frequent information snacks are shared in some way across social networks that the collective and collaborative experience of the participants will ultimately provide a depth and breadth of learning that begins to transcend traditional methods of teaching and learning and produces a completely new approach to the whole process of education that is actually appropriate to the 21st Century.

Maybe then we’ll even start to read reports in the e-newspapers raising concerns about binge education?

Higher Pass Notes: What is a Gagagogue?

This post follows on from Pass Notes: ‘What is a Pedagogue?‘ which you should read first, if you haven’t already done so!

Sir?

Yes, what is it?

You know the other week you were telling us all about Pedagogy and Andragogy, well the other day I came across the phrase ‘Heutagogy’. Do you know what that is Sir?

Ah yes, well I was coming to Heutagogy. I hope you weren’t suggesting that I don’t know everything about everything, which of course I do. Anyway, I’m the one asking the questions around here, so, err., can anyone tell me what Heutagogy is?

According to this, Sir, it’s a concept coined by Stewart Hase of Southern Cross University, and is the study of self-determined learning. The notion is an expansion and reinterpretation of andragogy, and it is possible to mistake it for the same. However, there are several differences between the two that mark the one from the other.

Heutagogy places specific emphasis on learning how to learn, double loop learning, universal learning opportunities, a non-linear process, and true learner self-direction. So, for example, whereas andragogy focuses on the best ways for people to learn, heutagogy also requires that educational initiatives include the improvement of people’s actual learning skills themselves, learning how to learn as well as just learning a given subject itself. Similarly, whereas andragogy focusses on structured education, in heutagogy all learning contexts, both formal and informal, are considered.

Ah well there you go, I’ve always warned you about the dangers of confusing andragogy and heutagogy – you can’t be too careful these days. Just a minute, why are your words appearing in bold this week and mine aren’t? There’s something wrong here…

No Sir, it’s just that this time it’s me writing this post, and not you. Because of heutolology I’ve learnt how to learn for myself, and I don’t think I really need you anymore. In fact I could probably teach you a thing or two. I’ve even coined a term for the process of the teaching of someone older than themselves: ‘Gagagogy’ – well actually it was my six year old sister who suggested it after a discussion with my baby brother. Do you think in years to come people will search for it on the internet and discover that it was a term I first coined back in 2010?

I sincerely hope not…

Not to be confused with: ‘Googoogogy’, which is the study of how people learn using Google and a ‘Googoogogue’, some one who studies how people learn using Google.