Comments on: 2020 Vision?

By: Katy mcDonald

Katy mcDonald — Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:02:57 +0000

I agree that the change is slow. I do however find hope in the idea that we are requiring more and more of our teachers. They have to meet new and higher requirements to get certified and must continue to learn in order to remain in teaching. I think it will truly weed out those who are not in education for the right reasons and will help to create the changes you are describing.

By: Hans Mundahl

Hans Mundahl — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 01:14:01 +0000

Thank you very much for this great post!

The comforting thing for me is that the early 20th century model was itself a radical departure from the previous era.

The model changed when faced with real and pressing needs from society. The world (or at least the US) arguably needed left brain, linear, broadly skilled (rather than specialized) citizens.

Today we need heuristic thinkers, generous collaborators and folks with a host of other new skills, behaviors and values.

At that point in history we were able to transform education to face the challenges of the day. We face new challenges, thus we require a new transformation.

And I think the risk of failing to transform is fairly high. If as you quote above, “education will occur in many different, more adaptive venues,” then schools (and educators) will have a devalued position except as baby sitters and for the credential.

By: Brian Kuhn

Brian Kuhn — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 19:45:08 +0000

Will, I am definitely hopeful for change in how we educate. I think a core issue is where the motivation to learn comes from. We talk alot about engagement – an engaged student is a learning student. In reading some of the comments above, someone talked about standardized tests. External motivations, like testing or most of our assessment practice as it is today, doesn’t work the way it did 30, 40 years ago. “Fear” motivated far more back then… Bring home a “bad” report card and you had to deal with mom & dad.

I think one key is to reenvision learning and schooling in such a way that intrinsic motivation rules all. Of course tie it to learning core skills, knowledge, etc. but when kids want to learn something, nobody has to force them. My son (17 yrs old) finds school to be a necessary evil… he never really enjoyed reading. But recently he pulled one of my conspiracy books (a fun interest area for me) and read it. He’s now spent probably 100 hours reading, researching, filtering, etc. about this topic and learning a ton. Okay, now I’m worried he might actually believe that stuff But, he’s internally motived by an interest.

How do we reinvent school so that each child is internally motived to learn and succeed? I think technology can help with the level of differentiation necessary for this…

By: Type III Work « Beth Holland

Type III Work « Beth Holland — Sun, 10 Jan 2010 14:32:34 +0000

[...] spend our days trudging through Type I tasks, and laboring through the occasional Type II day. In his last post for 2009, Will Richardson looks forward to the potential of the next decade. And, if like me you believe [...]

By: » 2020 Vision

» 2020 Vision — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 20:31:48 +0000

[...] we come with learning in the last decade and how far will we have travelled in the next decade. Will Richardson publishes his hopes and expectations of how much actual change will happen in schools over the next [...]

By: Joseph

Joseph — Mon, 04 Jan 2010 19:26:54 +0000

I agree Tony. I see our district becoming more dependent on tests(data) to show that learning is taking place, that to minimalize them now would be catastrophic to moving toward a new arena of thought. We are set in our ways in viewing the big picture that any coherent thought to the future is shoved under the carpet because they cannot image what it would look like let alone imagine how it should take place. Are schools(classrooms) not a place to take chances, explore and create? If this is true I have been lying to my students for many years.

By: How Will School’s Prepare to Meet My 3-Year Old Daughter’s Needs? « Creative Tension

Mon, 04 Jan 2010 17:24:18 +0000

[...] Richardson in his post entitled 2020 Vision questions the ability of our educational system to make substantial changes over the next 10 years. [...]

By: John Krueger

John Krueger — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 16:44:14 +0000

Enjoyed reading your reflections. I have followed your blog for two years now and have been inspired to keep my eyes on the big picture in spite of all the obstacles. I am a teacher in “Distance Learning”(already an outdated term)and am hopeful that DL can simply evolve into something that offers individual students- wherever they may be- more and more important learning opportunities.
In this next decade I hope that you continue to put the discussion out there for us. Web logs like yours are a vital part of keeping the ball rolling forward! Thanks.

By: Patrick Larkin

Patrick Larkin — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 13:17:42 +0000

I read the comments above and have to ask – who are the credentials for? I guess from my perspective (working in a typical suburban high school). The credentials we seek for our students are the ones that will allow them to get into the college of their choice. Therefore, I am worried that higher ed. will be “glacier-like,” as Tony put it above, in moving forward.

I am hoping that we in high school’s do not have to wait for this trickle-down effect to make changes. Can we do both – Prepare our students for what we think they need while also giving them the out-dated credentials that higher ed. is looking for? (While we are at it can we change higher ed’s name to next ed., I am not sure what higher means in some cases).

Finally, thanks for really slapping me in the mouth by making me think about where my kids will be in 10 years (they will be 21, 19, and 13). If that is not a call to start moving the agenda a bit, I am not sure what is!

Happy New Year! Thanks for remaining optimistic.

By: Tony Baldasaro

Tony Baldasaro — Sat, 02 Jan 2010 12:59:33 +0000

Will,
I continue to think about your post above. Two questions for you, one for fun, and one a bit more on point.

1. Did everyone either receive or give a Snuggie this year for Christmas. I gave one at a Yankee Swap (only to get it back) and my wife received a Syracuse one (much like your son’s Eagles one in the picture above).

2. I’m really stuck on this idea of “credentialing” and “educated”. There is no doubt that someone could be considered “credentialed” and “educated” without a traditional education. This has been the case since the beginning of time. However, with the connective technologies now at our disposal, it is more possible to receive a quality education without the formality of traditional schooling – which I would consider to be some combination of a brick and mortar school and the Carnegie unit. With that said, how do we convince traditionalists and policy makers that (connective) alternatives to traditional school have the potential to provide a more valuable learning experience?

My best to you and your family this new year.

By: Will Richardson

Will Richardson — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:46:55 +0000

Wondering if we solve that last part by making sure every kid has access. Wondering if is any way schools can even come close to preparing kids without 1-1.

By: Will Richardson

Will Richardson — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:45:07 +0000

That echo chamber part is one of the pieces that I find most troubling. I’m not sure there are many educators, myself included, who can model that balance very effectively. Constant struggle.

By: Will Richardson

Will Richardson — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 19:43:41 +0000

Absolutely right that we can’t stop nudging. But I wonder if we’re nudging the right people/things/systems. Maybe we should be thinking more “edupreneurially” (and I think I just made up that word) and coming up with ideas about where we can add educational value outside of school as well as effect change inside of school.

By: Tony Baldasaro

Tony Baldasaro — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 17:32:23 +0000

Will, my fear is that as long as we continue to measure “success” in traditional ways (ie. standardized testing) the resistance will be so great, that any change will be glacial at best. As you know, learning, true learning, can not be measured by some standardized test created at the state and/or national level. The movement toward national standards is not going to help either. I see it leading toward the standardization of schooling that will turn our teachers into “technicians”, simply covering materials as prescribed by texts and tests.

But, my larger fear is that this will create a larger divide between the “haves” and “have nots”. Those that will have the resources to not accept the standardization of schools will find other, more progressive avenues while those without such resources will be left behind.

By: Jason Kern

Jason Kern — Thu, 31 Dec 2009 16:32:47 +0000

I think there is little doubt that ‘education’ will move more and more to passion based learning whether it is inside the construct of school or not over the next decade. Kids are already seeking out information about the things they are passionate about and ‘learning’ through social media. The question becomes how much schools will be a part of this shift.

I believe teachers become very important guides, sherpas to borrow a phrase, as the students follow their passions. We need someone there to keep them well rounded in my opinion. Someone to play devil’s advocate and mold their thinking in ethical leadership.

The changes will be “evolutionary instead of revolutionary” inside the school system but if we do not accept the challenge, ‘learning’ will pass schools by and there will be less guidance as students simply search out there own passion based echo chambers.