Larry Cuban's recent post on school reform ("Educators’ Love Affair with Change") reminded me of the preface to my MA dissertation from 2010 - posted below. Even though this is six years old (and for the first time in public here), it still feels very contemporary and perhaps even prescient given more recent developments such as MOOCs, the Khan Academy and Sugata Mitra's work:
Preface
“Whether you are a scientist on a ship in Antarctic waters or a young
girl in a Philippine village, you can learn whenever and whatever you want from
whomever you are interested in learning it from.”
From the cover sleeve of: “The
World Is Open: How Web Technology Is Revolutionizing Education”
Curtis J. Bonk
July 2009
The statement is not as outlandish as it might seem on
first reading. Curtis Bonk is making the
point that technology, and in this case the Internet, and more specifically the
services that are facilitated by the Internet, have made information available
on a scale unimaginable to previous generations – and that it’s possible to
harness those services in the pursuit of education, the gathering of
information, and obtain assistance converting that data into knowledge.
I, too, have a strongly held belief that technology will
transform the world’s educational systems, for the better.
Thus I began to explore, using this dissertation as a
vehicle for that exploration, how university teachers use on-line learning
environments in their teaching.
Originally the technology I intended to study was “Multimedia” (audio
and video content), but it became clear later in the study that “Multimedia”
must include text based content and therefore the study expanded to include
attitudes and opinions towards on-line learning environments that by their
nature are often heavily text based.
This might be an appropriate point to inform the
reader of my background, to help them place my words and ideas and others
concepts and notions into the reader’s knowledge landscape – to give a context
to this dissertation.
Computers and me go back a long way. I first came across computer equipment first
hand in school in 1976 – firstly using a local council mainframe via a remote
tele-type device and the second was an early micro-computer from Research
Machines using a Z80 8-bit microprocessor.
I studied computer science at school, gaining 'O' level, 'A' level and
then my first degree in the subject.
Hence my background with the technology is deep, wide and, perhaps in
the IT industry, ancient; or in e-learning, even pre-historic.
I spent 20 years in the IT industry, became a
classroom teacher of ICT from 2003 (following my PGCE) until December 2007,
when I took up the role of a Learning Technologist.
Hence I have a good background in technology and
education – and am currently finding my role as a learning technologist suits
my experience and background.
Over the past few years I have become increasingly
dissatisfied with the education system.
This paragraph is explicitly designed to be contentious in order to
illustrate – and I admit that it suffers from the precise “Academic Liteness” I
go on to accuse the educational establishment of. Around 2005, whilst working as a classroom
teacher, I came to the conclusion that the UK’s compulsory education system, especially
provision from 11 years on is dis-educating our children. During my time as a teacher I have observed
children being taught how NOT to learn, sometimes as a side effect of the
system evidencing how good it is at doing its job. Notions of “Spoon Feeding” only scratch the
surface of my dissatisfaction. And now as
a parent I see my own children suffer the same fate. Parents remain trusting of the system to
educate and/or contain their children.
Educators impose their attitudes and beliefs as to what is best from a
frequently paternalistic and often “evidence lite” perspective. Such approaches echo with Freire’s (1972)
notions of colonial education, where the oppressed (children) are educated
using the curriculum of the oppressor (education system). I believe that to be effective, education must
be driven by the desires and interests of the learner, not of the system. There are initiatives in many countries that adopt
this “Radical” educational approach, such as the Sudbury schools in the USA (Holzman
1997) and the educational philosophy of the city of Reggio Emilia, Italy (Thornton
and Brunton, 2006). In the UK, Summerhill School
(Andresen et al.,
1995) has shown both how successful the philosophy can be and how distasteful
the educational establishment find the approach (the school has suffered a
barrage of attacks from Ofsted (House of Commons Standing Committee G (pt 9), 2002)
and the DfES (BBC News, 2000).
I believe the free and open educational resources that
are mushrooming via the Internet (MIT, BBC’s Byte Size etc.) will evolve,
Darwinian style, into the best of breed.
There is nothing any authority, government or educational stakeholder
can do to stop this. To prevent our
learners, at whatever age, access to these resources in full, by overtly
blocking access to, like the Chinese government, or implicit restrictions, like
the UK’s education system demanding that our children attend the sort of
institution a child from the workhouses of the 18th century would
recognise, is wrong. Further, these
attitudes are dangerous to the prosperity of future society. Curtis Bonk explores these issues in “The
World is Open” – (2009:367-368) in which he suggests (demands?) that education
be learner led, facilitate unfettered access to best of breed materials, and
ditto staff (teachers, facilitators, co-constructors).
David Callaghan
December 2009
References: Current reference list.
