Comments on: Response to Jay Matthews at the Washington Post

By: Joe Bires

Joe Bires — Thu, 26 Feb 2009 23:15:41 +0000

Great piece on Jay Mathews’ article. I really don’t think Jay expects his readers to be educators, he writes more for the general public and if we allow his message out there without a rebuttal (like your’s) it really confuses the average member of the public. I deconstructed some of his article on a post I did on my blog.

http://edtechleadership.com/wordpress3/?p=84

Great quote at the end of your article;
“teaching our kids to navigate the world as they are experiencing it, not the world we experienced.”

By: Wanda

Wanda — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 18:22:32 +0000

There is nothing wrong with 21st century skills as long as we (teachers) use them to connect to the skills our students will need to be competitive and successful when they graduate. Even though school systems are slow to transform, there are still many ways to introduce bits of the emerging technology. Students are eager to engage in this new direction of instruction. What they need is guidance in ethics (cooperation, teamwork, and respect). Change for the sake of change is not the motive, but rather change with improvement, greater accomplishment, and increased effectiveness—for both teachers and students.

By: Jim Peterson

Jim Peterson — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:50:13 +0000

I agree that reading, writing and reasoning are huge 21st century skills, even more so than last century. This does not change the fact that these skills are more relevant, fun and engaging when they are applied in a new 21st century setting. We, the people who have learned so much from our self taught 21st century skills, are proof that it is not a fad. Our students, introduced to the power of the their own learning networks, will continue, just like us.

By: Daily Bookmarks 01/06/2009 « Experiencing E-Learning

Daily Bookmarks 01/06/2009 « Experiencing E-Learning — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 03:44:14 +0000

[...] Weblogg-ed » Response to Jay Matthews at the Washington Post [...]

By: Vincent Baxter

Vincent Baxter — Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:57:05 +0000

The argument is so mid-2008 (See problem solved by Nancy Walser in September/October 2008 Education Letter).

By: Will Richardson

Will Richardson — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:26:53 +0000

Hey Tim

Thanks for the comment. I don’t think that singular leadership is necessarily a good idea, though I do think that there might be some good work in trying to get the folks involved in this conversation to do some “collective action” in Shirky’s words. Your blogging and podcasting is not a part of the problem, btw, as long as your “writing” honestly, I think you are contributing.

By: sylvia martinez

sylvia martinez — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:26:53 +0000

Terry,
I’m really sorry if you felt what I said was disparaging you personally. I do believe that there are metaphors that work on a personal level that don’t work when you try to scale them. That’s what I was trying to say, and obviously the words didn’t convey that well.

However, I do think that there are words, such as pedagogy, that are better defined than terms like methods. And if you notice, I was more careful to talk about what I believe is a better learning environment, than simply saying that such a thing exists for all. My term, my head — and I acknowledge that this doesn’t translate for anyone else. Until I explain it, show it, and do it in real life, it’s just words in my head. So that’s what I try and do every day. Sounds like you do too.

By: Dave

Dave — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 18:00:04 +0000

“21st Century Skills” is such a nebulous term that it kind of feels like debate for the sake of debating.

The intent seems pretty obvious: parents and the community realize that the Internet is changing things, and they want students to be ready for the new workplace. I guess the crux of the argument is whether schools are trusted to update their curriculum as appropriate, or whether government needs to micromanage.

The funny part of the whole thing is that these 21st century kids are going to have the mythical “21st century skills” by definition, no matter what we do. It would make more sense to either teach old people “21st century skills”, or teach kids how to accommodate and work with (work around?) people who don’t use new online tools when they’re the best tool for the job.

By: Terry Elliott

Terry Elliott — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:47:43 +0000

I gave the website so that you could go see what Warlick says. Mine was a comment not a treatise. Aren’t you guilty of ill-defined terms as well? Pedagogies? Learning environments? Of course, I assume that there are specifics, but that like me you are constrained by the “comment” format.

I am not sure we disagree. As a teacher I feel I am moving through method to get to approach. I am going through a process to get to a product. I am learning a skill in order to make it an unconscious part of my learning and teaching. For example, I am an avid user of Diigo as social bookmarking tool. I am using it in my classes now, but only after I have internalized it in my own personal learning environment (am I allowed to use those words?). I have moved from a discrete skill and have integrated it into my larger approach to research. I am diving deeper into technology every day and making real changes in my classes based upon the skills I acquire and internalize. I am focusing on local, classroom pedagogies every day I teach.

In a way we all rely on words to establish dialogue. Words are all we have and I certainly hope that I can do better, but it is hard when the dialogue starts with the emotional baggage of “simplistic”, “noise”, and “that’s great”.

By: Why the Fight? « Keeping Kids First

Why the Fight? « Keeping Kids First — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 17:40:13 +0000

[...] Will Richardson’s blog “Weblegg-ed“ [...]

By: sylvia martinez

sylvia martinez — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 16:04:11 +0000

I think using undefined, overly simplistic words like “approach” and “method” just adds to the noise. Is it because the word “method” seems more structured, and “approach” implies something you do more intuitively?

Terry, you’ve found something you like in the distinction that makes sense to you, and that’s great, but now what? There’s no way to dive any deeper and make real change based on this.

And changing the word “skills” to “methods” doesn’t begin to explain the changes in pedagogy and learning environment I think need to happen.

Technology may be the proverbial horse that leads people to the water of school reform, but you can’t make them drink by giving the water catchy new names.

By: Don Watkins

Don Watkins — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 13:38:43 +0000

Amen!

By: Wally

Wally — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:40:37 +0000

All of these so-called 21st Century Skills are well and good BUT all of the comments deal with literacy and how that improves through use and application in the various social networks. As a high school teacher of mathematics I have yet to see anything that remotely deals with numeracy.
In the Algebra for all movement and the view that Algebra is a gatekeeper to college I’d like to see discussions on how to use these various tools to reach ALL students. The top 40% are easy. The challenge is to reach the lower 60% and in particular the lower 40% who are not motivated since they have experienced very little success in mathematics since the 3rd grade when multiplication and division MUST be mastered but are NOT. These students arrive in high school with barely a 5th grade skill level in mathematics and they are sitting in an Algebra 1 class.
Any ideas on how to use these wonderful tools to motivate these student to learn algbera would be greatly apreciated.

By: Terry Elliott

Terry Elliott — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 10:27:26 +0000

David Warlick approached this topic recently (http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/?p=1662) from a different angle. Instead of writing about skills he called them methods and held them separate from and inferior to “approaches” to using technology. To sum up his position: an attempt to discretely teach tech skills among the digital natives is doomed to irrelevance.

I think that method and approach are related. I find that I have to internalize methods in order for an approach to emerge. The methods I choose are not so much right or wrong, but more what is personally appealing and, I think, what fits my particular stance on the world. They work together. Just as no one would argue that process and product are separable, so too methods and approach are inseparable.

And so too are the social skills in a new social environment. As Warlick says, “If we walk into our classrooms as master learners, then we might come to better understand that working with information is as much about approach as it is about method.”

By: Barbaram

Barbaram — Tue, 06 Jan 2009 01:47:50 +0000

What part of this statement,

“This is the all-at-once syndrome, a common failing of reform movements. They say changes must be made all at once, or else”

even makes sense??

At the very least, presently one can read Christensen’s “Disrupting Class” which has a graphable timeline for change, based on compilable data. Furthermore, how does anyone get through ANY educational system and not have an inkling about historical timelines?

Gotta agree with Gary Stager.You been punked????

Barbara