Education Models Evolve

Technology, , , , , , ,

In Audrey Watters’ essay, The Invented History of ‘The Factory Model of Education,’ she provides an insightful analysis of recent statements by respected leaders for change in education. According to them, the Western education system is based on an outdated factory model stemming from industrialization and consequently, it needs to be replaced. Watters makes a cogent argument that this assumption is untrue based on historical facts.

I agree. It is true that the goals and maybe even the mechanics  of industrialization became intertwined with American education by the late 20th century.  But it took a long time to standardize the system.  For example, in 19th century rural America, the major purpose of multi-age one-room schoolhouses (about 200,000 of them) was to make people feel more connected to an emerging nation, to teach them the responsibilities of living in a democratic society. There was no resemblance to industrialization.

During Reconstruction, schooling was very important to African Americans; learning to read and write had been denied them as slaves. Education was the first step towards equality. In urban areas, schooling was mostly enjoyed by the elite until child-labor laws were seriously enforced in the 1920’s and 30’s allowing working-class children to take full advantage of public education. Until then, most children were “industrialized” through apprenticeships and early work years, not schools.

Watters cautions:

We tend to not see automation today as mechanization as much as algorithmization–the promise and potential in artificial intelligence and virtualization, as if this magically makes these new systems of standardization and control lighter and liberatory.

And so too we’ve invented a history of the “factory model of education” in order to justify an “upgrade”–to new software and hardware that will do much of the same thing schools have done for generations now, just (supposedly) more efficiently, with control moved out of the hands of labor (teachers) and into the hands of a new class of engineers, out of the realm of the government and into the realm of the market.

In other words, just because we have a new format in technology does not mean that its content will set us free. Accredited education will always involve the passing on of societal values and goals.

However, I would not be so quick to say that with technology solutions teachers will be replaced as education influencers. Many EdTech startups are depending on teachers to create content and pedagogy that work in digital programs.

We need engineers and instructional designers to lead in technology. Developers admit that they are far from creating education technology that is scalable—cost- and learning- effective. They want to work with educators and government agencies to “make it happen.”

How we educate students and who has control will depend on how well experienced educators, technology experts, and government agencies can collaborate for the common good—an old but still valid concept.  Let’s not allow the high speed of technology push any of us into premature interpretations, predictions, and solutions. Let’s not jump from the exaggerated gloom and doom interpretations of the past to gloom and doom predictions for the future.

What’s in a Name?

Big Picture, , ,

Learning is a complicated process that is difficult to define. We all know it when we experience it. We also know when we don’t. We know the difference between passing a test because we pulled an all-nighter and passing because we really understand and have thought about the material. When I think of learning I think process: explore, discover, connect, invent.

Learning can happen formally in school or in an online course. We also learn through activities, social interaction, and just plain exposure. We can learn from a positive experience such as attending a play, or a negative experience such as getting mugged afterwards. Through learning, we become who we are and develop attitudes toward learning. As I look back, I realize that my love of learning was spurred quite randomly—by my last name, Diogenes.

Diogenes was a Cynic in Ancient Greece who scorned material things and those who owned them. Choosing to live in the marketplace, he slept in some sort of tub and engaged in personal acts in public explaining that one should not be ashamed of what is natural.

Diogenes defended morality, reason, and truth. When Plato defined man as a featherless biped, Diogenes supposedly plucked a chicken and tossed it into Plato’s lecture saying, “This is Plato’s man.” Plato changed his definition.

According to a popular story, Diogenes carried a lantern in broad daylight. When asked what he was doing, he said he was looking for an honest man. So people used to ask me, “Have you found an honest man yet?” I only answered yes once when I called a wedding planner about my ceremony and she asked. I answered, “Yes, and that’s why I’m calling you.”

The inquiries of strangers started me trying to find answers and eventually sent me to the library to do research on Diogenes. I even applied to college as a philosophy major. One professor, who was holding oral exams with each student, began our appointment by saying he had looked at his calendar and wondered if he was interviewing Diogenes about Descartes or Descartes about Diogenes.

Even today I dip into stories on Diogenes. Recently I read a great book, Examined Lives, by James Miller, because it had a chapter on Diogenes. That’s why I picked up the book, but, of course, I learned a lot more. It seems somewhat incredible to say, but it’s clear that I would be a different person if I had been born with another last name. And learning may not have become the enjoyable, gratifying experience it is for me if I were not a Diogenes.

Many people badmouth the use of electronic devices: “Children can’t focus on more than a few paragraphs” “They will never be able to think of anything on their own.” What if we look at it from another perspective? Now young people explore, discover, socially connect, and create through digital devices everyday. One could say that the processes of learning are embedded in their lives more than ever. And you never know which random stimulus can lead to a love of learning.

Extrinsic Versus Intrinsic Motivation

Education Strategy, , , , , ,

Educating students in school relies on motivating them to learn. Studies and discussions on the meaning, application, and benefits of extrinsic and intrinsic motivation are happening as digital programs are created and instructors are incorporating them into their curriculums.

Very broadly, extrinsic motivation comes from outside in the form of stimuli or rewards such as ranking, salary, badges, and praise. Intrinsic motivation is prompted by inner feelings such as curiosity, need for belonging, and satisfaction. How extrinsic and intrinsic motivation can sometimes relate to each other is the moral of a story that has made the rounds in psychology circles for years:

A group of children go every day after school to chant anti-Semitic remarks in front of a store owned by a Jewish man. One day the man comes out to the children and says, “This is what you call yelling? I can hardly hear you. If you promise to yell more loudly, I will pay you each a dime.”

The children accept and every day, after they yell for a while, the store owner gives each a dime. After about two weeks, the store owner comes out and says, “You’ve been doing a great job; but business has been bad lately, and I can only pay you each a nickel.” The children protest, but they accept the reduced payment.

After another couple of weeks,  the store owner comes out to say, “I’m sorry, but I can’t afford you anymore. You’re welcome to continue, but I won’t be able to pay you.” The children reply, “You think we are going to do this for nothing? No way,” and they never come back again.

What has happened here? The intrinsic motivation of fun or satisfaction, (no matter how twisted) that spurred the children to act in the first place was replaced by extrinsic motivation (money) and when the external reward disappeared, so did the original intrinsic motivation. This is a simplistic analysis, but the point is clear: Be careful with extrinsic rewards.

Schools have already tied learning to extrinsic rewards: grades, test scores, medals, badges, diplomas. Isn’t that enough? These rewards have robbed many students of a love of learning. We can’t let that continue.

The world of phenomenal change that we live in makes lifelong learning more important than ever. Ditto for intrinsic motivation. We need to make sure that students desire learning without all the bells and whistles.

In the past, a higher education graduate could choose a career and plan to thrive in it through experience and some professional development. Now, we are expected to learn new technologies and ways to communicate every year. Instructors are expected to integrate technology as they teach.

The best preparation for success is knowing how to learn and to want to keep learning. Creating a deep consonance between internal satisfaction and learning in students will ensure that they are able to initiate and navigate the changes at the core of 21st century life.

For a more data-based scientific explanation of how extrinsic motivation can ruin intrinsic motivation see “Extrinsic Rewards and Intrinsic Motivation in Education: Reconsidered Once Again” by Deci, Koestner, and Ryan.

Failing is for Everyone

Education Strategy, , , ,

The world of entrepreneurs is running hot these days. Innovation is at the heart of entrepreneurship and to be successful that innovation must fill a need. Successful innovators identify a problem to solve.  Examples: Venmo, an electronic wallet app (Wouldn’t it be great if, after a shared dinner, we could pay each other back through our phones?), Tinder, a quick dating app (Wouldn’t it be easier to just hook up with people without all the requirements of on-line dating?), or Teachley, an EdTech company basing programs on cognitive science (How can teachers use app data to make faster, better decisions about student learning needs?).

Entrepreneurs know that they should “fail fast” because it’s a waste of time and money working on something that ultimately is not going to succeed. Entrepreneurs work fast, hard, and cheaply to create basic prototypes called MVP’s (Minimally Viable Products) that they can try out on friends, family, and market segments to find out quickly: Is this a product that people want? Will this work? How can I make it better? The product may or may not turn out to be something to pursue.

To an entrepreneur, failure is part of the process, often a badge of honor. Many successful entrepreneurs include “I failed X times and I learned from my failures” in their speeches to help motivate others. Success follows from failure if you are able to accept failure and learn from it.

Learning is a personal process of innovation. When you learn, you encounter, try out, and adapt new knowledge and ways of thinking. So why are students punished for failure: bad grades, not getting a diploma, embarrassment. Those who fail consistently often develop a form of learned helplessness: Psychologists have found that if people fail enough times without understanding, they will just give up trying. School for many children is a dead end of failing or a deflating experience of average accomplishment.

How can we turn students into learning entrepreneurs, learning from their mistakes, and trying again? One way is through transparency. We should incorporate ongoing review with students of their learning pathways. Explain how learning A leads to B. When they fail A, suggest other ways to get to B.

Another solution is to make problem solving and hard work the center of learning. Carol Dweck, Stanford University, has shown colossally positive results with children in failing schools by changing their attitudes to a “growth mindset,” a belief that abilities are not fixed, they can be developed through investing time and energy.

In her TEDx talk, Dweck gives an example of a Chicago school where students who fail are given a “not yet” rather than an F. The “not yet” signals that they are on a trajectory, they are on a journey. Failure is not a stop; it’s not a reason to give up. It’s just a bump in the road. Figure out how to get past it and you will keep moving forward. That’s a lesson we all should learn.

Read more on what educators can learn from entrepreneurial perspective on failure in Kathleen Parker’s Washington Post article, “How we succeed by failing.”

Gamification and Education

Technology, , , , , , , , , ,

I recently completed an excellent Coursera MOOC on gamification taught by Professor Kevin Werbach, Wharton, University of Pennsylvania. Gamification is the art of applying gaming principles to business, education, fitness, basically any area that is not about simply playing a game.

Both gaming principles and education involve motivation. Motivation is something internal (drive, need, craving) or external (environment, stimuli, rewards) that pushes us to action. Motivation moves us from one psychological or physical state to another usually to enjoy a positive feeling.

Hunger motivates us to get something to eat. Loneliness motivates us to connect with people. Not knowing motivates us to learn. However, it’s not that simple. If you are hungry, but it seems too hard to cook a healthy meal, you might settle for a bag of chips. If you are lonely, but are too shy to make friends, you might not do anything to relieve your loneliness. If you don’t know how to work Smart TV, and there’s a complicated explanation in a pamphlet, you may just give up.

Gamification can boost motivation through digital delivery. If you have an app that keeps track of your food intake, sends you quick healthy recipes, and so forth, you will be more motivated to skip the chips and cook. If you can be social on-line, you will be motivated to reach out. If you can just push a button on your remote to give you instructions, you are more likely to learn.

With digital programs we have the opportunity to motivate more students to learn whether through personalized learning or systems that make it easier and more fulfilling to achieve. Digital formats have already made it more appealing to complete assessments by offering instant feedback on whether students have answered correctly.

There is a lot to learn from gaming without turning every lesson into a game. The first step is to think holistically. Amy Jo Kim, CEO, Shufflebrain, says that good game designers think about the player’s whole journey, both cognitive and emotional: “A player’s [student’s] journey is their experience/progression over time.”

Not only do students bring their cultural, economic, and cognitive experiences to the learning environment, they also bring their digital prowess. A student today starts school using digital products. Exciting digital elements that work well in elementary school may not resonate in later grades.

There is also the journey through the particular program, how the student will progress and connect to the content between the beginning and the end. Some programs are very formulaic such as video/reading content/activity/quiz. The same format that motivates students in Chapter 1 may not in Chapter 10.

Game designers take into account Richard Bartle’s four types of users: Achievers, Explorers, Socialisers, and Killers when creating games. Do these categories hold true for student users? Frankly, we don’t know, but we have resources in place that can help us find out. Much of EdTech’s focus has been to develop programs that produce data profiles of individual students to inform short-term formative strategies and summative outcomes. If we collaborate, we can aggregate individual student data to discern types of digital students. This type of analysis will help us chart successful education journeys.