Today I stumbled onto an RSA animate of a speech given by Sir Ken Robinson last year on changing paradigms in education. In this speech Robinson believes that in education we're trying to meet the future by doing what we did in the past.
This is because it's in the gene pool of education.
Public education is a product of The Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution. The Enlightenment constructed a view of the mind, and as such the learner and also the curriculum. The Industrial Revolution provided an economic reason for public education. Our present model of schooling is modelled on the interest and the image of industrialism.
Robinson argues that models of learning (and therefore schooling) need to go in the opposite direction to standardisation; standardisation reflected in curriculum and testing. This doesn't imply a lowering of standards.
Below is the RSA animation to the talk (11mins 40 sec).
The full version of the original speech is below (55mins 20secs).
There are a number of questions that arise that perhaps require some divergent thinking!
What are our new models of learning?
How can education best meet the future?
What leadership is needed?
How can this change be brought about?
What is needed to make this change last?
After all schools are remarkably resilient places in their present structure.
I woke up this morning to find I'd received the following email from Stephanie Williams from WPSU/Penn State Public Broadcasting:
As I'm sure you're aware, many experts believe the education system in the U.S. needs significant restructuring. WPSU-TV recently interviewed Sir Ken Robinson on a series called “Conversations From Penn State” where he discussed the problems facing the education system and suggests ways to improve it by promoting creativity. After reading through your blog, I think you and your readers may be interested in the interview. It can be found at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL0WW3tR8Kc and I have provided the embed code at the bottom of this message if you wish to share the video. Please let me know if you have any question or if you decide to post the video.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Williams
As regular readers would know, I resonate strongly with Sir Ken Robinson and what he has to say about education.
Often times teachers and leaders in schools are hamstrung by an education system that is focused on reforming and teacher-proofing, resulting in standardising students and de-professionalising teachers.
However, There are many people in education for whom teaching and education is their passion. It is where they are in their element.
Video: Conversation from Penn State with Sir Ken Robinson
This conversation draws on Ken Robinson's work, The Element. During the conversation he makes the following points:
People underestimate themselves
The problem is the education system, not teachers and principals
Transformation is what's required, not reform
There's an obsession with Standardised Testing
Schooling is resulting in "standardising" kids
Reforms are focused on teacher-proofing.
After viewing the video I'm left with the opening question that was put to Ken Robinson:
What sparked your interest in education?
I'd be interested in what your thoughts on the conversation are. I have placed my own summary, comments and thoughts after the video.
My summary, comments and thoughts on the conversation
I have been working on my PhD studies which has involved me interviewing many primary and secondary teachers. As part of the interviews teachers commented on their view of schooling and themselves as a teacher. Several of these teachers, primary and secondary, commented that teaching is more than content and subject areas. Teaching is about students realising their full potential.
These teachers seem to believe this, yet an outcome of the education system, according to Robinson, is people underestimating themselves. Robinson highlights this when he comments that there is a view that only special people are creative or are good at Maths. For me it raises questions as to what we might mean be "full potential".
Robinson indicates that systems of mass education are the result of mass industrialism. The education system has been crafted in the image of industrialism. The education system is linear and based around supply and demand. It's a system that is about conformity, standardising and a presumed workforce and less about diversity. The system is founded on the IDEA of UTILITY: that is what will be useful in gaining employment and making a living.
For Robinson, education systems are obsessed with standardised testing. This culture of testing can result in narrowing the curriculum and teaching to the test. This comes at a price for students and teachers. Robinson believes that in attempting to deal with a culture of standardised tests the education system is standardising students. It also results in a stripping away of teacher professionalism.
Many Government policy makers invest huge amounts of time, money and energy in attempts to teacher-proof the system through public accountability resulting in standardisation: teacher standards, leadership standards, standardised testing, public reporting of results comparing schools, common curriculum.
Teacher-proofing won't work. Why? Because teaching is more complex than standardised solutions. Scotland discovered this. Improvement processes can result in isomorphism - where it all starts to look the same, no matter the context. Robinson states that students don't comment on the curriculum or the testing regimes as making a difference to them at school.
Students regularly comment that it is the teachers who were significant to them at school. It's teachers (or other mentors) who can result in students realising their passion, and perhaps their full potential.
Many leaders and teachers are grappling with the issues of transformation. Just the other day I was having a conversation with a secondary teacher around the need for things to be different in schools. The teacher, a very competent and successful teacher teaching in a highly complex secondary school, commented on the challenges she was faced with on a daily basis. The world isn't changing - it has changed.
There seems to be a convergence of thinking around creativity, learning and schools. More and more it seems that creativity is a key feature of the "next age" in society.
Conceptual Age, creativity, creative minds
Dan Pink puts forward an argument that we are moving from the knowledge and information age and are now entering the Conceptual Age. The Conceptual Age is characterised by empathy and creativity.
The emergence of the Creative Class is a concept explored by Richard Florida, where he recognises a central role for talent and creativity in economic development.
The Creative Class is a class of workers whose job is to create meaningful new forms (2002). The Creative Class is composed of scientists and engineers, university professors, poets and architects. The Creative Class also “includes people in design, education, arts, music and entertainment, whose economic function is to create new ideas, new technology and/or creative content” (Florida, 2006, p. 8). Their designs are widely transferable and useful on a broad scale, as with products that are sold and used on a wide scale. Another sector of the Creative Class includes those positions which are knowledge intensive, these careers usually require a high degree of formal education (2002). Examples of this sector are health professionals and business management, who are considered to be a part of the sub-group called Creative Professionals. Their main job is to think and to create new standard approaches for fixing the problem at hand. Creativity is becoming more valued in today’s global society.
The importance of creativity is a theme that Sir Ken Robinson picks up on in his interviews, presentations and writings.
Sowing the seeds for a more creative society
Irecently stumbled upon this clip of Mitch Resnick presenting at MIT Museum SOAP Box. His topic was Sowing the seeds for a More Creative Society.
The video is interesting in exploring themes of learning, collaboration and creativity. Mitch talks for about 30 minutes. The remainder of the time is facilitation and exploration of issues by participants with Mitch.
There are opportunities for schools to move from delivering information and ensuring good command of facts to spaces that allow students to work collaboratively to think and act creatively.
Working collaboratively to think and act creatively should be a central focus of what happens in learning - for students, teachers and leaders. In many schools this is starting to happen.
He has developed new technologies designed to engage people (particularly children) in creative learning experiences. These technologies include a program called SCRATCH, as well as LEGO Mindstorms.
The interviews we're shown in two 15 minutes sessions over two nights.
He raises a number of interesting points (as is usual) which caught my imagination.
How can you educate for productive future?
This is a challenge that many schools are trying to address in exploring 21st Century learning. Recently I was working with a Principal who was preparing a submission for a National Quality Teaching Award. At the heart of the schools innovation was the desire to provide learning experiences that prepare the students with skills and understandings to engage with issues facing us today that will shape the future.
We have the power of imagination and capacity to solve the problems that face us.
Kids that start school in Kindergarten this year will be retiring in 2070.
No one knows what 2070 will look like.
Robinson argues that most education reforms are backwards-looking. They are trying to address existing systems that are the result of the Industrial Revolution.
There are some real challenges for the future. Robinson believes that politicians should stop trying to teacher-proof the education system through the curriculum and testing regimes. Teachers need to be given the room to breath and do their jobs.
It was interesting that the same day Greg Whitby(Executive Director, Catholic Education, Diocese of Parramatta) had tweeted:
anyone else frustrated with latest fed govt partnerships model for supporting learning and teaching. No explicit principles underpinning them
He is right (I think). The National Partnerships that form part of the "National Education Revolution" here in Australia lack any real principles of learning and are another political attempt at teacher proofing. The way forward may lie in the National Partnership: Teacher Quality - but I fear not, unless the profession, through organisations such as the Australian College of Educators, takes some leadership over this agenda
The same is true to some extent with the Building Education Revolution that is largely replicating school buildings from last century; or the Digital Education Revolution which is seeing a roll out of laptops in secondary schools. Why not handheld devices?
There is a need for robust conversations around what education should be and could be; and what schools and schooling will look like within that.
As I am presently between work at the moment I have had the opportunity to catch up on some of my podcasts from TEDTalks. One of my favorites is this TED video of Sir Ken Robinson. It is very provocative, insightful and funny.
Certainly one of the areas that I am particularly interested in is the place of creativity within teaching to stimulate and promote innovation to transform schooling and learning. I often wonder to what extent schools kill the creativity and passion of teachers.
Posts
