I was listening to Wes Fryer's podcast this morning - Be (Constructively) Digitally Disruptive in 2007. He was saying how we need to move on from the original Bloom's Taxonomy with 'evaluation' as the highest order skill to the recently produced by the APA which puts 'creation' (i.e. knowledge creation) at the top of the pyramid.
School 2.0 is no longer about the teacher as the all-knowing fountain of knowledge. It is about teachers knowing where to go to find information and how to validate its authenticity in order to guide students through the ever ending stream of resources. In short, it is about information literacy and management.
I also thing School 2.0 is about questioning and learning to think for oneself... not becoming part of the "sheople" who just blindly follow without thought and/or reflection.
And finally, I think School 2.0 must also include a paradigm shift for the teachers. There must be a motivation to continually learn and stay abreast of new technologies and information - a continual quest towards growth because skills and information are so quickly outdated. Teachers, not just students, must be willing to continually adapt and change; otherwise, they will become relics of the past instead of beacons for our future.
I agree with everything you say... but with regard to the last thing, I agree, but I also think that the paradigm shift must include creating schools where teachers have the time do to just that. Right now, my fear is that many teachers feel so overwhelmed that the idea of trying to stay on top of all this stuff just feels overwhelming.
I agree... the majority of the time teachers feel very overwhelmed and overburdened so it is difficult for them to make time to explore new technologies, instructional strategies, advances in their subject area, etc. Some time to plan, collaborate and explore would be great!
I love how you start out with a post-technological view of School 2.0, and with a nod to Dewey.
I am unsure of your take on the digital microscopes. I know they are a small part of the topic, but I think your comments bring up some differences between "seeing" and "knowing."
On one level, I agree that the digital microscopes can be used to captures images and thereby expand students' knowledge of microorganisms. If students do not draw and label well, then the digital images may be able to help them "see" better.
On another level, I plan to coach students to post digital renderings alongside hand-drawn images. This is important because students' knowing is enriched when they have to pay attention to detail. For example, the physical act of drawing of cilia and flagella help students to cognitively "know" the difference between the two.
If you wanted to study Renior, you cold take digital images and then perhaps create a portfolio that highlites some artistic devices or patterns. OK. But there is certainly great value in studying Renior through the replication of technique. The physical act of painting ina Renior style, however imperfect, is a useful means to know Renior.
Back to 2.0. I wonder if we may sacrifice knowing, or being, in the embrace of "quick" technology.
My hope is that by using the technology to get through some other parts of the work we used to have to do, we can spend more time on knowing and being. We used to say that students learned better by re-writing papers each draft, but now, there is (to my knowledge) consensus that word processing has made student writing and editing better.
And what's interesting is that I lost interest in biology because I am such a terrible artist. I hated having to draw the cells and such, because I never felt like what I wrote resembled what I saw.
I think we can find ways to allow the capture of images to give students more time to study what they've seen and learn deeply.
Chris -- Needless to say, I am chompin' at the bit to see how you use this same mind-stream to spark debate, wonder, a bit of fear, and a heck of a lot of passion with the school architects and designers who will read your words at DesignShare next month. Needless to say, I can see the 'memoir' and 'manifesto' of yours coming into focus! Well done. And the "criminal" piece, in particular, blew my doors off. Man...no punches pulled, indeed! Cheers, Christian
I really like your exposition of Web 2.0, and particularly your challenge that it is about the pedagogy. I think that is our challenge right now, to make sure it is about the pedagogy and not just layering on the gadgets or tools, but more about what Ian Jukes calls transformative technology.
I also agree with your assessment of teachers feeling totally overwhelmed.
While I know many of our teachers are aware of so many of the new opportunities web 2.0 tools can create, I hear daily the issue of lack of time.
I posted on one of our school blogs regarding an article in Business Week (which I heard on a podcast this weekend )about Best Buy. The story, Smashing the Clock, (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/06_50/b4013001.htm?chan=search) is about Best Buy's transformation of their corporate workday with a method called ROWE (Results only work environment). Employees are evaluated based on various metrics that Best Buy uses, but they don't have to report to work at any particular time. They can work from home or come into the office when they want. Anyway, it struck me when I was listening to it that perhaps that is what school 2.1 will be like and how exciting that could be.
And I thought of the opportunities for teachers in a system like that. I know a few high schools are trying a more college model, which I also think would be helpful to providing more time for staff(and for students for that matter).
I really like your closing remarks about 21st century citizens, because the understanding and ethics we help our students discover are traits they will carry as citizens into the workplace.
Your blog hit upon so many points that I think we are missing with this testing required by NCLB.
I enjoyed the Dewey quotes and thought if you are futurist then you are a futurist no matter the time.
I also loved the idea of 21st century citizen rather than the worker.
Do we have top down or bottom up changes? Both groups need to see the benefit of these changes for the well-being of our students.