Disruption is a term that is bandied about a lot these days. We have Clayton Christensen to thank for that. According to Christensen there are two types of technologies - sustaining and disruptive. Sustaining technologies are those which simply as they develop provide incremental improvements over what they replace - think of the regular cycle of OS and application upgrades in this category. New versions provide incremental improvements as they evolve. Disruptive technologies on the other hand may not have a clear position in the first instance. But what they definitely do is completely shatter the current thinking by providing a totally new way of doing existing stuff, or indeed provide a completely new business opportunity, one that did not exist before. Think 3D printing, think social networks, think iTunes and Spotify, think Uber.
But we need to look carefully at what we do as a result of choosing to use the word in the context of education. By this I mean "What does disruption mean in the education space?" "What are some examples?" "What implications does this have for me in my classroom?" In many ways this is a natural follow on from my previous note called "What's Up Doc?" You see, my previous blog post talked about one of the issues in K-12 education being the outdated mode of assessment that we use at the sharp end of the schooling system. Almost every country has some form of high stakes testing that is used to determine student success. It was Seymour Papert who taught me years ago that the dominant technology of the day dictates the activities in the classroom. And to me it seems that despite claims to the contrary, look around most schools and you will see the dominant technology of today. From the photocopier, the printer and the textbook to the exercise books and the worksheets ... the dominant technology in our classrooms today is the same as it was 50 years ago. Paper. We restrict the majority of our learning opportunities for students to activities that can be done on paper. And by this very choice we severely restrict what goes on in our classrooms. Paper is the ultimate 1:1 technology - 1 person, 1 piece of paper. It's not easy to collaborate on a sheet of A4 paper. It's not easy to share a piece of paper across time and space. It's not as if technology hasn't been in and around education for a long time. I recall the days of the TRS-80, Franklin Ace, BBC Micro, Atari, Commodore 64, Sinclair ZX81, Apple II. NZ even toyed with its own Poly Computer back in the 80's. But the way that technology is largely deployed in schools follows at best the "sustainable" model. At best we make incremental changes to the existing way we do things. We use a word processor or presentation tool rather than handwrite an essay or make an A3 poster. We use a blog perhaps as a slight step up. We make a video to show something rather than write about it. But the root tasks sitting behind these are often the same root tasks that we have always done. We make a presentation about Ancient Egypt. We make a presentation about the civil rights movement. We use a graphing tool to draw the graph of a quadratic equation rather than plot points. The task is largely the same. If the purpose of education, the goals of education, are the same as they have always been, if the task doesn't need to change then no amount of technology will make any difference. So, technology breakthroughs have not led to education being disrupted. Not yet anyway. Sure, tablets like the iPad and Surface Pro make life a bit easier to do some stuff. But we are still doing the same old - just with new kit. What we need are, as the SAMR model puts it, the "redefinition" tasks. Those that promote the higher order thinking and collaboration that we say are of such value into the future. Not that I'm promoting the SAMR model - it has a growing number of detractors - but what it does do is give what I call "below the line" [the Substitution and Augmentation] and "above the line" [Modification and Redefinition] options - and having just two options makes it easier for us as teachers to work with. My view anyway. So we look for new things that we couldn't do before that will promote the student behaviours and outcomes we say we want. Being a maths teacher from way back, though haven't taught it for years (spend my time these days teaching digital technologies and computer science) I liked the post from Grant Wiggins back in 2014. In it he proposed a maths test that I've copied here for you ... "A test for conceptual understanding. Rather than explain my definition further here, I will operationalize it in a little test of 13 questions, to be given to 10th, 11th, and 12th graders who have passed all traditional math courses through algebra and geometry. (Middle school students can be given the first 7 questions.) Math teachers, give it to your students; tell us the results. I will make a friendly wager: I predict that no student will get all the questions correct. Prove me wrong and I’ll give the teacher and student(s) a big shout-out. 1) “You can’t divide by zero.” Explain why not, (even though, of course, you can multiply by zero.) 2) “Solving problems typically requires finding equivalent statements that simplify the problem” Explain – and in so doing, define the meaning of the = sign. 3) You are told to “invert and multiply” to solve division problems with fractions. But why does it work? Prove it. 4) Place these numbers in order of largest to smallest: .00156, 1/60, .0015, .001, .002 5) “Multiplication is just repeated addition.” Explain why this statement is false, giving examples. 6) A catering company rents out tables for big parties. 8 people can sit around a table. A school is giving a party for parents, siblings, students and teachers. The guest list totals 243. How many tables should the school rent? 7) Most teachers assign final grades by using the mathematical mean (the “average”) to determine them. Give at least 2 reasons why the mean may not be the best measure of achievement by explaining what the mean hides. 8) Construct a mathematical equation that describes the mathematical relationship between feet and yards. HINT: all you need as parts of the equation are F, Y, =, and 3. 9) As you know, PEMDAS is shorthand for the order of operations for evaluating complex expressions (Parentheses, then Exponents, etc.). The order of operations is a convention. X(A + B) = XA + XB is the distributive property. It is a law. What is the difference between a convention and a law, then? Give another example of each. 10) Why were imaginary numbers invented? [EXTRA CREDIT for 12thgraders: Why was the calculus invented?] 11) What’s the difference between an “accurate” answer and “an appropriately precise” answer? (HINT: when is the answer on your calculator inappropriate?) 12) “In geometry, we begin with undefined terms.” Here’s what’s odd, though: every Geometry textbook always draw points, lines, and planes in exactly the same familiar and obvious way – as if we CAN define them, at least visually. So: define “undefined term” and explain why it doesn’t mean that points and lines have to be drawn the way we draw them; nor does it mean, on the other hand, that math chaos will ensue if there are no definitions or familiar images for the basic elements. 13) “In geometry we assume many axioms.” What’s the difference between valid and goofy axioms – in other words, what gives us the right to assume the axioms we do in Euclidean geometry?" What would you expect to see in the way of student answers to something like this. Let them use whatever resources they want to help, let them collaborate and come up with some solutions. This is a redefinition of the task in my view. Technology can probably help significantly here. Maybe students could use tools like the Wolfram Alpha computational engine or any other tools they like. While changing the task doesn't necessarily disrupt the maths classroom, it certainly will make it a bit more interesting at some points in time. For more current examples of disruption - we all know the disruption to bookstores (and lots more) by the Amazon and the AliBaba online stores. We all know of the disruption to photography brought by the digital camera (and now phone). We all know of the disruption to music and software distribution by the likes of iTunes, Google Play and the various app stores. And of course music is undergoing yet another disruption with the likes of Spotify, iHeart Radio, BeatsOne. But these disruptions have been around for a while. Perhaps two of the best examples of disruption today are the taxi/transport industry and the hotel industry. Uber have totally disrupted the traditional notion of "calling a cab" and in a few short years have a market cap of over $50 billion. Sure there are issues as the traditional businesses convulse and try to "lawyer" their way out of oblivion, but Uber has set a strong precedent by removing the monopoly and "democratising" a service directly between individuals. [Doesn't this sound a lot like "swapping goods" back in the very old days?]. Airbnb has recently posted that they housed 17 million people in the last quarter. They are valued at around $24 billion (more than the Marriott chain - and they own >4000 hotels). They weren't around 7 years ago. They don't own hotels. Like Uber, they "own" a system that makes it easy for people who want a service and those who can provide that service to make contact and close a deal. Uber and Airbnb facilitate the advertising and payments. The cost to the participants - basically zero. A cell phone and a free app. I've maintained for many years that education is due for a major disruption. There are three things, in my view, that are holding this disruption back. But there are signs around that indicate some of these reasons may not be reasons for too many more years. Firstly - education is political and heavy investment is made by all western countries in it. There is substantial investment in real estate and bricks and mortar. Not only does education provide employment for large numbers of people, there are vast "industries" built around education - from traditional publishing houses that dominate that paper technology and that lock up through various copyright and DRM management regimes "educational content and distribution", through to those "institutions" that lay claim to be the physical and virtual buildings from where you should get your "degree" from. Secondly, education provides (and I don't mean this in a derogatory way) a strong social service by providing baby sitting services for millions while parents work. But work is changing and changing fast for many. Thirdly - some guidance and security for younger students is required. It would be hard to envisage 5 - 14 year olds (say) being able to self regulate and form their own communities of practice. There is plenty of research evidence which supports direct instruction for the new learner. It would be unrealistic to put learners in front of a "system" without expert teacher input and expect instant success. But - outside of these three (admittedly big) reasons - there are plenty of signs that at least a proportion of "learning" can be delivered via a similar Uber of Airbnb interface. It's just a matter of putting the right content into the right place. And this is being done to some degree right now - especially in certain areas of "knowledge". I think it is important to consider what is happening around us - and so much is happening that I feel I want to comment on that this post is in danger of becoming too long and disjoint at the moment - so I'll pause here and continue in another post in the next few days. If you've read this far - thanks for listening to me ...
0 Comments
An article by the Vice Chancellor of Massey University, and published in the Herald on September 25, has provided the opportunity to reflect on a number of things. The article is worth a read, though I'll pick the key points and put them below for further reflection. the majority of these young people did not do well at school. In most cases they left early disillusioned and all too often with the feeling that they were failures. As Sir Richard points out, they are far from being failures. The reference is to Sir Richard Taylor from WETA Workshop staying that many of their employees are creative, articulate, intelligent ... but did not go too well in the traditional classroom environment. We shouldn't be surprised at that - Sir Ken Robinson tells the delightful story of the music teacher who told 50% of the Beatles that they were no good at music. And the often dragged out story of Bill gates and Steve Jobs as being high school drop outs. But then, so were Mark Zuckerberg, James Cameron, Tom Hanks, Frank Lloyd Wright plus many others. The point, as Vice Chancellor Maharey says, is that the "one size fits all" approach doesn't work for everyone. Unless of course your predetermined goal is to rank according to performance on a limited range of testing techniques. And this is the issue. The limited range of testing techniques is, well, limited. In a time and place where teamwork is most valued, we assess at the "high stakes" end of the schooling system with rigidly individual assessment regimes. What we need to be talking about is the kind of learning that we think is appropriate before we get to assessment. Good learning begins with the curriculum. Over recent weeks I have had four guest speakers talk with one of my classes of Year 11 students. They are an IT class studying the NCEA Digital Technologies curriculum (more or less). All of the speakers were at pains to explain that they all worked as part of a much wider team of people and they planned and executed their plans together with everyone else knowing what was being done by whom and by when, and that any individual can get help from anyone else to solve any problem. But in the environment that is this particular assessment regime, student collaboration is forbidden. Yet ... and go figure this one... a student can use the web to "self solve" a problem. So - let's just expand on this a little. Let's assume that I have posted a video on my Youtube channel showing how to use a particular bit of code to solve a problem. Let's assume that some other students in the class have done the same. The student in the class who is struggling with a concept can use these resources quite happily - but they can't ask the person sitting next to them in the room for the same help ... This is simply a case where curriculum and assessment fail to keep pace with what technology affords. And it is a fair bet that any system of assessment that is rooted in tradition will suffer the same issues. The fact, of course, that universities (like the one Maharey is VC of) lay down entry requirements to many of their undergraduate courses means that some form of ranking or hierarchy is perpetuated. This is a world that will belong to flexible, innovative creative life-long learners; people who will judged not on what they know but on what they can do with what they know. So, how would you feel if you had just told John Lennon and George Harrison that they had no musical talent? What about if you were the head of school that saw the likes of Harrison Ford, Lady Gaga, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs drop out to do something else because what you were offering wasn't for them. Maybe Maharey is on the right track with this comment .. For my money, the kind of assessment system that will assist with these outcomes would be a 'learning record' that stays with a student throughout their life - something that has been talked about in New Zealand and elsewhere in the world. I wonder what that might look like and where it would be housed. And who would have access to it? Is it like the A4 binders my kids have at their primary school each year? Is it like the "learning log" that our Junior School students carry with them? Is it like an e-portfolio?
I'm not advocating the abolition of testing as we know it, but I am certainly of the view that it is not the answer to "what is the best way to show student learning?" And ultimately our current desire to assess student knowledge in the manner we do is a major part of the answer to the title of this post ... "Whats up, Doc?" |
This blogThe information presented here is simply to share my thoughts and provoke thought. If it also provokes action, so much the better. Archives
December 2020
Categories
All
|