Thomas Friedman's Thank You for Being Late: An Optimist's Guide to Thriving in the Age of Accelerations is his latest book. He continues to examine his theme of interconnectedness and competition and its impact on the world. I was first introduced to Friedman's work when my children were in primary school. Our school superintendent talked about The World is Flat and preparing our children for a changing world in which we do not know the shape of the landscape. Since that time iPhones, iPads and tablets have certainly changed the way we communicate. Immigration has radically changed the faces of our communities- some are frightened by the influx of people from less well off regions of the world, while others see it as the way America became great. The Middle East continues to be a threat to the status quo, but its reach has been magnified. The indisputable fact is that the world is a different place than when my son started school a decade and a half ago.
Friedman identifies three major accelerators to change in our world: Moore's Law, the market and Mother Nature. Moore's Law relates to technology: every two years technology doubles its productivity. The 8K computer of my freshman year of high school was replaced with a 16K machine my senior year. (Schools are not on the cutting edge of technology.) Bandwidth, processors, chips become twice as fast and memory twice as large approximately every two years. The market is what people think of when they think of The World is Flat- the globalization and interconnectedness of the business community. People compete and collaborate across the globe. In the Middle Ages people were bound by their immediate community. In the Age of Exploration they were given the opportunity to escape their communities. In the Industrial Age we saw the movement of goods begin to spread across international borders. In the Information Age we no longer have to go- we send the information electronically. Mother Nature is climate change. No one can argue that we have had several major hurricanes this year- far more than is typical. Nor can they argue the increase in volatility in weather patterns. Global temperatures are warming, the ice caps are melting, and the world is entering its next period of change.
Friedman argues that these three factors combine in ways that mean our world no longer has the expectations it once did. People need to be educated to flex with the rapidly changing world around them. They need to become capable of adapting to information and technology at ever increasing speeds. They need to be able to learn new skills. They need to move forward or else they will be left behind. Trump would argue that to make America great again we need to stem the accelerators. Friedman would argue that you can't and to deny them is to be left behind. He quotes Sondra Samuels say that we need to recognize "the importance of a two generation approach" (p. 434) to build healthy communities in our inner cities. If we remain focused on what can I do today to improve x, we will always fall short of the goal. We need a long range view. The Chicago preschool experiment demonstrated that high quality preschool increased on time graduation rates, employment rates and incomes while decreasing grade retention, incarceration and teenage pregnancy. If you just examine impact within a year or two you miss the richness of the outcomes. We need to take a long range approach, perhaps two generations, to improve the quality of our neighborhoods and the lives of all our citizens. We need to develop an attitude of acceptance of diversity, an importance of education and a standard of excellence.
A world where we live in fear breeds Putin and North Korea. A world where we live in despair and hopelessness breeds Isis. A world where we live in obedience breeds Nazism. We do not want these worlds. We need to spread hope, empowerment and success or we will fall away from greatness. Never has isolationism on our part helped us to compete and remain great. We need to address the concerns of the world's people and raise up everyone. If we focus on keeping "them" down, we hold ourselves back as well.
Sunday, October 29, 2017
Wednesday, October 18, 2017
Disruption and education
Thomas Friedman talks about disrupters in his latest book, Thank you for Being Late. Being in the middle of this text, it was interesting to read Peter W. Cookson Jr’s article in edweek, 10 Disruptions That will Revolutionize Education. Cookson talks about “moving from distraction to deep learning” as one of the educational challenges we must now address. His disruptions include:
1. Digital learners rebel against intellectual conformity- Yes, our young people are divided by the digital and physical realm, seeking solutions rather than reflection, but his assertion that they multitask easily is wrong. They multitask, but much research shows that they do this at the expense of everything they are doing. Conformity and standardization are things that people in our country have fought for decades, it is not new as Cookson proposes. Long is the complaint against youth that they rebel against conforming to society.
2. Learning avatars will become commonplace.- True there is an increase in the use of intelligent programing that adjusts to the performance of the user. The challenge here is that we will still need to balance the idea of mastery versus time. Our students, teachers, schools, and states are measured on how well students to versus a set curriculum. Since all students do not learn at the same rate, at some point we need to make a choice about moving on and achieving coverage (a court case in California ruled that a class of students who did not cover particular material could not be assessed on it by graduation gatekeeper tests) and proficiency. Further, recent research says that personalization does not actually achieve increased success with material. We really do not know how to utilize electronic platforms to maximize learning.
3. Participatory-learning hubs replace isolated classrooms- Yes, students are increasing linked to the global universe.
4. Inquiry skills will drive learning- Tell that to the science teacher community. For the past 30 years they have been supporting this idea, and it has not caught on. Social studies groups promote the concept of doing the work of historians- reading and analyzing primary source material- but we remain testing the dates of the Civil War. While there is an increase in teamwork and cooperative learning, most implementations of these activities enable little real collaboration. This rolls back to assessment- are we going to do easy assessments with "right" answers or are we going to do complex (read expensive) ones that are more subjective?
5. Capacities will matter more than grades- “Conventional grading is already becoming outdated.” No kidding, but this is not new. Standards based report cards and grading are making strides in some places, but not all. What employers want is a tool to use that says this students is a good bet- they have soft skills like persistence, punctuality, and a willingness to learn as well as hard skills like a basic ability to engage in the three Rs. While capacity to do a job is slowly making inroads into the business community, this is not something we should hold our breath for.
6. Teachers will become inventors- He talks about social emotional learning here, not inventors. I think he is getting at the link between cognitive skills, social emotional skills and creativity. Teachers have been doing this forever. In 1976 when PL 94-142, the federal special education law, was passed, they recognized these links and included both in the analysis of student skills.
7. School leaders will give up their desks- Many people love their desks and will never give them up. The amount of paperwork that the educational bureaucracy requires does not lend itself to deskless lives. “Student agency in a culture of mutual respect” is what he proposes here. While many schools and classrooms are student centered, our insistence on standards of learning limit this. Novice learners need guidance and support to learn and push forward. We can argue about the relevancy of trigonometry and algebra 2 all day, but without outward pressure to learn these subjects, few students would ever engage in them and since they do not have real work application for most people, they would go by the wayside leaving our applied math programs like engineering and science at a loss.
8. Students and families will become co-learners and co-creators- This is an age-old idea, but one that is not shared by many cultures, including those in many low socioeconomic areas and immigrant cultures. Middle class families already are co-learners and have been forever. Engaging the families is not something that will happen on its own but will require careful and concerted effort on the part of the schools.
9. Formal credentials will no longer be the Holy Grail- Centuries ago being a lawyer meant working with a mentor for a while before opening your own shop. The same with doctors. We have formal credentials for a reason- to offer the public some assurance that the individual has a level of skill. We do not have the skill set to go to the doctor and interview him on his knowledge about medicine. We expect that to be taken care of before we pass through his office door. Although many jobs can be completed without formal credentials, employers rely on credentials for screening purposes. Different types of credentials are becoming the norm- online programs are increasingly able to bring education to a greater number of students, apprentice programs are available in some areas. Some form of credentials, however will remain the norm. Portfolios work in some fields and have for a long time- architects showcase their previous work, authors list their past writings, athletes have records of success- but this will not likely spread to all fields.
10. Policymakers will form communities of continuous improvement- Really. How does he propose to get the politicians out of education? We are moving in the opposite direction. While there is a group of think tanks that process research and implement new ideas, these ideas are slow to capture our attention. “New math” has been the social pariah for a long time and was passed over at least once since its conception. Convincing the public to allow and encourage innovative educational policy is an ongoing battle.
I guess I am pretty pessimistic about the disruptions that are proposed. Not that many of them are bad ideas, just that the pace of change in the educational world is so much slower than that of the business world. We talk about our children not keeping up with the global community, and in some ways that is true. I think it boils down more to motivation than to activity- to a theory that they should be allowed to "be kids" rather than mini-learning machines. In China or India your choice is education, hard work and success or dirt floors and public well. Many other parts of the world do not even have the option of education.
Disruptions will change how we educate. Some are bigger forces than others. The bigger mountain, however, is to change society's perception of the role of education. As a country and a culture, we do not have unity on the purpose of education. We are increasingly allowing government to control what we teach and how we teach it. I think perhaps the biggest disrupter will be the people rebelling against the status quo and allowing that a new way of educating might be superior to the one we experienced as youths ourselves.
1. Digital learners rebel against intellectual conformity- Yes, our young people are divided by the digital and physical realm, seeking solutions rather than reflection, but his assertion that they multitask easily is wrong. They multitask, but much research shows that they do this at the expense of everything they are doing. Conformity and standardization are things that people in our country have fought for decades, it is not new as Cookson proposes. Long is the complaint against youth that they rebel against conforming to society.
2. Learning avatars will become commonplace.- True there is an increase in the use of intelligent programing that adjusts to the performance of the user. The challenge here is that we will still need to balance the idea of mastery versus time. Our students, teachers, schools, and states are measured on how well students to versus a set curriculum. Since all students do not learn at the same rate, at some point we need to make a choice about moving on and achieving coverage (a court case in California ruled that a class of students who did not cover particular material could not be assessed on it by graduation gatekeeper tests) and proficiency. Further, recent research says that personalization does not actually achieve increased success with material. We really do not know how to utilize electronic platforms to maximize learning.
3. Participatory-learning hubs replace isolated classrooms- Yes, students are increasing linked to the global universe.
4. Inquiry skills will drive learning- Tell that to the science teacher community. For the past 30 years they have been supporting this idea, and it has not caught on. Social studies groups promote the concept of doing the work of historians- reading and analyzing primary source material- but we remain testing the dates of the Civil War. While there is an increase in teamwork and cooperative learning, most implementations of these activities enable little real collaboration. This rolls back to assessment- are we going to do easy assessments with "right" answers or are we going to do complex (read expensive) ones that are more subjective?
5. Capacities will matter more than grades- “Conventional grading is already becoming outdated.” No kidding, but this is not new. Standards based report cards and grading are making strides in some places, but not all. What employers want is a tool to use that says this students is a good bet- they have soft skills like persistence, punctuality, and a willingness to learn as well as hard skills like a basic ability to engage in the three Rs. While capacity to do a job is slowly making inroads into the business community, this is not something we should hold our breath for.
6. Teachers will become inventors- He talks about social emotional learning here, not inventors. I think he is getting at the link between cognitive skills, social emotional skills and creativity. Teachers have been doing this forever. In 1976 when PL 94-142, the federal special education law, was passed, they recognized these links and included both in the analysis of student skills.
7. School leaders will give up their desks- Many people love their desks and will never give them up. The amount of paperwork that the educational bureaucracy requires does not lend itself to deskless lives. “Student agency in a culture of mutual respect” is what he proposes here. While many schools and classrooms are student centered, our insistence on standards of learning limit this. Novice learners need guidance and support to learn and push forward. We can argue about the relevancy of trigonometry and algebra 2 all day, but without outward pressure to learn these subjects, few students would ever engage in them and since they do not have real work application for most people, they would go by the wayside leaving our applied math programs like engineering and science at a loss.
8. Students and families will become co-learners and co-creators- This is an age-old idea, but one that is not shared by many cultures, including those in many low socioeconomic areas and immigrant cultures. Middle class families already are co-learners and have been forever. Engaging the families is not something that will happen on its own but will require careful and concerted effort on the part of the schools.
9. Formal credentials will no longer be the Holy Grail- Centuries ago being a lawyer meant working with a mentor for a while before opening your own shop. The same with doctors. We have formal credentials for a reason- to offer the public some assurance that the individual has a level of skill. We do not have the skill set to go to the doctor and interview him on his knowledge about medicine. We expect that to be taken care of before we pass through his office door. Although many jobs can be completed without formal credentials, employers rely on credentials for screening purposes. Different types of credentials are becoming the norm- online programs are increasingly able to bring education to a greater number of students, apprentice programs are available in some areas. Some form of credentials, however will remain the norm. Portfolios work in some fields and have for a long time- architects showcase their previous work, authors list their past writings, athletes have records of success- but this will not likely spread to all fields.
10. Policymakers will form communities of continuous improvement- Really. How does he propose to get the politicians out of education? We are moving in the opposite direction. While there is a group of think tanks that process research and implement new ideas, these ideas are slow to capture our attention. “New math” has been the social pariah for a long time and was passed over at least once since its conception. Convincing the public to allow and encourage innovative educational policy is an ongoing battle.
I guess I am pretty pessimistic about the disruptions that are proposed. Not that many of them are bad ideas, just that the pace of change in the educational world is so much slower than that of the business world. We talk about our children not keeping up with the global community, and in some ways that is true. I think it boils down more to motivation than to activity- to a theory that they should be allowed to "be kids" rather than mini-learning machines. In China or India your choice is education, hard work and success or dirt floors and public well. Many other parts of the world do not even have the option of education.
Disruptions will change how we educate. Some are bigger forces than others. The bigger mountain, however, is to change society's perception of the role of education. As a country and a culture, we do not have unity on the purpose of education. We are increasingly allowing government to control what we teach and how we teach it. I think perhaps the biggest disrupter will be the people rebelling against the status quo and allowing that a new way of educating might be superior to the one we experienced as youths ourselves.
Tuesday, October 10, 2017
Friedman's heating and lighting
I was first introduced to Thomas Friedman when my children were small and I attended a board of education meeting for our school district. Our superintendent was talking about the age of globalization and competition, about how the world would be different for our children than it was for us. I tracked down a copy of the World is Flat and appreciated the insights of this author and his message. A couple of years ago my daughter had to read the book for a college class and she too was impressed with the message. Friedman's latest book, Thank You for Being Late, has also captured my attention. His clear and easy writing style explains why he is a successful journalist. Although not far into the book, I have been ruminating on one of the messages of the introduction- he talks about the role of the opinion writer as being either heating or lighting, an analogy that I think would be good for talking to students about persuasive and argumentative writing.ads
He proposes that you have two options "turn on a lightbulb in your reader's head- illuminate an issue in a way that will inspire them to look at it anew- or stoke an emotion in your reader's heart that prompts them to feel or act more intensely or differently about an issue" (p. 12). This is the classic logos or pathos issue that Plato described updated to today's language. Friedman argues that ideally an author does both. Friedman's writing style does just that- he bombards the reader with facts designed to showcase certain things and then expresses it in a way that shares why you should care- your heart gets engaged. Friedman tends to be more of an economist than a politician in his outlook. I believe Friedman would agree with Marx in stating that the world is driven by economics rather than by political or social goals. Yes they are intertwined, but the driving force is the economic one.
When I think about our president and his use of rhetoric, it all focuses on the pathos or heating piece of the puzzle with some appeal to the element that Friedman does not discuss, ethos- appeal to authority. Trump uses his role as a businessman and now President to claim he must be right, an argument that Cigna, an insurance provider, takes comic advantage of with it's TV doctors of America ads (see here and here). Trump's favorite bit of rhetoric, however, is the heating business. He wants people shouting, cheering and afraid so that he can manipulate them to support him. We need to teach our young people to be wary of these devices so that they can analyze for themselves the information they receive and make informed decisions, not scared decisions.
He proposes that you have two options "turn on a lightbulb in your reader's head- illuminate an issue in a way that will inspire them to look at it anew- or stoke an emotion in your reader's heart that prompts them to feel or act more intensely or differently about an issue" (p. 12). This is the classic logos or pathos issue that Plato described updated to today's language. Friedman argues that ideally an author does both. Friedman's writing style does just that- he bombards the reader with facts designed to showcase certain things and then expresses it in a way that shares why you should care- your heart gets engaged. Friedman tends to be more of an economist than a politician in his outlook. I believe Friedman would agree with Marx in stating that the world is driven by economics rather than by political or social goals. Yes they are intertwined, but the driving force is the economic one.
When I think about our president and his use of rhetoric, it all focuses on the pathos or heating piece of the puzzle with some appeal to the element that Friedman does not discuss, ethos- appeal to authority. Trump uses his role as a businessman and now President to claim he must be right, an argument that Cigna, an insurance provider, takes comic advantage of with it's TV doctors of America ads (see here and here). Trump's favorite bit of rhetoric, however, is the heating business. He wants people shouting, cheering and afraid so that he can manipulate them to support him. We need to teach our young people to be wary of these devices so that they can analyze for themselves the information they receive and make informed decisions, not scared decisions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)