Education: For Better, For Worse, For Change

There is something strange going on in education – It’s getting both better and worse at the same time.

Exam grades have been improving year on year and this summer students achieved the best exam grades so far in A levels and GCSEs while International studies place our students in the global top 10. However, when students answer questions from past decades they do worse than their historic counterparts.

It seems no one is happy – there is the usual argument about exam “quality” – Richard Pike for example  complains that science exams standards have been eroded and that first year chemistry students require remedial education, employers complain that graduates lack soft skills and students enjoyment of science and maths has dropped remarkably.

All these things are true because education is changing.

Information, knowledge and education are embedded within culture and society – the nature of our culture and society changes and have changed radically over the last 20 years. Information is the stuff of education but our relationship to information is very different from that of 20 years ago and even 10 years ago. Back in 1988 information was a relatively slow and scarce resource – “locked up” in papers and books. Today both students and teachers have “at your fingertips” Internet access to overwhelming amounts of information – today information is a fast and overloaded resource.

Methods of dealing with a resource that is slow and scarce are different to those needed to deal with a resource that is fast and overloaded. With slower moving scarce information education focused on the subject with deeper operations on the available information. With faster moving overloaded information education is focused on information with broader operations on the available information – the ability to find, filter, assess, use and communicate information

Michael Shayer found students today were better at tasks requiring quick, descriptive responses whereas students from the 1970’s were better at deeper more “complex” thinking. Shayer goes on to relate these changes to the changes in society and culture – “everything in the past 30 years has speeded up. It’s about reacting quickly but at a shallow level”. Information management and “soft” skills are often referred to as “dumbing down” but I would argue that they are just different and that they are as valuable and complex as the deeper subject skills many value more.

The one experiment that can’t be done is to observe how students from the 1970’s and 1980’s might cope with the information rich world of today. Our students, teachers and education system have adapted to the changes in society and technology. Today we use information technology as a tool for mechanical (e.g. simple arithmetic) and memory tasks to free time for information handling tasks such as research and the application of information to problems. Subject operation is different – instead of “deep” within subject questions we seek to operate more broadly and ask questions that relate subject knowledge to the world we live in.

The curriculum is seeking to adapt to changes in technology, culture and society. The Rose report  for primary education suggests that six broad “areas of learning” could replace individual subjects. Looking ahead to the year 2020 The Gilbert report for secondary schools calls for increasing curriculum breadth and more active, collaborative and creative learning. Looking at the global economy the Leitch report calls for Developing a culture of learning (integrating learning with life and work) and the development of communications, collaboration, research and problem solving skills.

The various sectors of society want different things from education and as a result no one is entirely happy. Universities want deeper “hard” subject knowledge and competence. Employers want subject competence but also want adaptable people with “soft” skills. Institutions want to be able to test and measure performance.  The government wants entrepreneurs and innovators. On the one hand society wants “hard”, measureable, “traditional” education yet on the other hand it wants “soft” and innovative education.

Somehow education must reconcile the need for measurable deep subject skills with the need for innovation which develops best on a broad base. The only answer is for the education system to be increasingly flexible and adaptive and to offer choices. One approach is through the personalisation of education suggested by Rammel together with a choice of learning/teaching/course/qualification styles.

The questions about education I am most interested in are:

What do students think?

What do students want?

Cloud the Issues

This blog discusses cloud computing in relation to organisational culture and the forms of cloud computing that may be adopted as a result.

The issues with cloud computing are the same issues that have existed on the Internet since it was created issues of identity as constructed through relationships to control and ownership. This shouldn’t be surprising as the term “cloud computing” is after all based upon the network symbol for the Internet.

Relationships to control and ownership are formed through specific requirements such as legal obligations and through psychology.   

Approaching Cloud – First Impressions describes some of the system types available for cloud computing – they can be regarded as if on a continuum from the more traditional “product on-site” approach (not really cloud) through to a fully MASHED DIY approach.

Those who wish or need to assert identity through strong control and ownership of information are unlikely to feel comfortable with the concepts of cloud computing and would be most comfortable with traditional “product on-site” adoptions. Such individuals or organisation may also find hosted products with appropriate Service Level Agreements acceptable.

 Those who are or can be more relaxed about control and ownership may feel  comfortable with approaches from mid range cloud services approaches from Microsoft live@edu or Google apps for education  through to the more extreme Mashup Corporation, Mesh Collaboration or ideas of Clay Shirky  in “Here Comes Everybody” which web 2 and cloud computing make possible.

One of the most frequently discussed issues when talking about the use of Cloud computing in teaching is that of ownership of teaching materials whether these belong to the organisation or to the teacher or some form of shared ownership in between. If the organisation exerts control and ownership over materials then an IT system which allows this control must be implemented – most likely product on-site installs, hosted systems or possibly an organisational controlled cloud system such as  Microsoft live@edu or Google apps for education . Where the individual control and ownership is agreed then teachers’ personal resources can be used and MASHED in. Where DIY MASHUP is used then the organisation has to consider what happens if/when the individual leaves, changes  or withdraws material and what that individual publishes in public space – these are as you might appreciate issues of identity as expressed through ownership and control.  It is easier to exert an identity if you control and own the medium and the collection of messages available on the medium. Organisations which allow a MASH of personal DIY lose the ability to control the messages – they have to trust their people and truly become the sum of the parts.

The advantage of exerting control is that you can exert a clear identity – a particular “mission statement” in a particular style. This suites a “command and control” style of management and is effective where there are clear objectives and outcomes – it is particularly suited to sectors where known repetitive and fixed operations are required. The disadvantage is that the organisation is less flexible than it could be – everything is pointed in the same direction and may not see the changes coming up behind – good for when you know where you are going but not suited for activities where you need to adapt to the unexpected – where you don’t know where you are let alone where you are going – by this I am referring to areas where invention, innovation and creativity are required.

Relaxing control and ownership offers the advantages of a dynamic flexible organisation defined by its members. This suites a flat, networked, “self organising” style of management  - such an organisation may be difficult to point in one direction but able to see in many directions, to generate multiple ideas and be flexible – such an organisation is best suited to invention, innovation and research. The disadvantage of course is that identity is expressed dynamically through the activity of members which can lead to fragmentation and anarchy.

All organisations are different and will accommodate and assimilate technologies and opportunities according to their unique culture. In my opinion education is about recognising individual differences and developing individual potentials and as such I argue that educational organisations should be relatively relaxed with control and identity – that they should be considering their unique approaches to personal DIY systems for the near future.  The technology exists and continues to develop but is the psychology there?

Is the Education System Damaging Education

Like many organisations and systems the education system is constrained by systems of measurement.

To examine a subject we need content, a syllabus and meaningful measures of performance. A major argument is that education has become about passing tests rather than learning and that the tests define education by limiting that which can be taught.

The recent comment from Professor Lachlan MacKinnon about the content of ICT taught in schools is bound to raise a debate.  

 

The education system has a problem – on the one hand it is being asked to be more flexible, to change and innovate yet on the other hand the measures it has to satisfy have to be static and stable to be meaningful.

 

 Education should be more about learning rather than teaching – developing self study, research, collaboration, presentation – ACTIVE LEARNING.  The future of learning will probably have less and less to do with being taught.

 

By focusing more on the process of learning rather than teaching we may have a chance to introduce the flexibility we are being asked for. Learning skills can then still be applied to specific tasks in order to measure outcomes (exams/tests).

 

The typical school ICT syllabus is most likely to cover old fashioned client-server or if lucky web 1 systems but is unlikely to include anything on “cloud computing” – indeed many web 2 and cloud systems would be banned.  If we were to focus more on achieving particular tasks rather than teaching particular systems we would have opportunities to make ICT education more relevant

Education: PIE and MASH-Beyond Space and Time

Consumerisation and personalisation are the underlying trends in recent education thinking, technology developments and our culture generally.

This blog attempts to combine recent educational proposals with recent IT developments, describe some of the challenges and make some suggestions for meeting these challenges.  

Recent educational papers  promote ACTIVE LEARNING through consumerisation and personalisation. They promote demand led learning, competitive learning markets, learner accounts, greater learner choice and soft skills such as research, problem solving, collaboration, communication and information management. We will also be expected to deliver learning across boundaries – in the workplace, in other institutions and at home.  The educational papers suggest the mindset required.

Recent IT developments promote ACTIVE IT through consumerisation and personalisation developments in mobile technology and use (smartphones, UMPCs, WADs, mobile broadband) and through continued development in the capabilities of on-line social networking and Web 2 applications and spaces. The IT developments suggest the tools required.

My opinion is that developing NET technologies such as PIE (Personal Information Environments) and MASH (the ability to combine different information sources) will provide some of the tools to operate and learn beyond the traditional boundaries of Space (locations) and Time and allow us to deliver the Active and Personalised learning the educational papers promote. The crucial thing is that these tools are useless without the mindset to operate them and that the tools and mindset have to apply to institutions and not just to learners.

The Challenge

Recent educational thinking promotes active learning and soft skills such as research, problem solving, collaboration, communication and information management yet our systems (exams, quality, IT and buildings) offer an environment developed from 20^th century learning approaches and don’t offer a natural environment to develop active learning.

Everyday life will be increasingly mediated by the net (information, leisure, work, learning, shopping, socialising, etc) and being “on net” is increasingly vital. This will be the context in which we will be expected to operate in the near future. We should expect to see more people seeking web access and carrying around Web Access Devices (smartphones, UMPC, laptops etc). We should expect to see more people using personal web spaces – interacting through social networks, using web 2 applications or using customised Personal Information Environments (PIE) created by MASHING applications, feeds and links.

In education there is a tension and a challenge. Young people, teachers and institutions are operating at different speeds within different contexts – young people (major educational consumers) are relatively comfortable with “NET LIFE”. Teachers have some experience of “NET LIFE” but generally don’t have the time or support to explore and develop it and its use in education. Institutions change even slower – they have few incentives to engage in the risk that change brings – to do so risks upsetting hard worked quality development.  Thus we have a problem – educational thinking, technology, culture and our students are all moving on at a faster pace yet how are institutions expected to deliver in the real world the reforms described in educational papers.

The challenge is to be able to provide active learning opportunities in increasingly flexible ways – for learner “consumers” to access learning where, when and how they wish. Rammel (2006) for example illustrates one aspect of our challenge –  “The development of Specialised Diplomas as a modular qualification with young people taking different modules or qualifications in different institutions will present challenges.”

Suggestions for meeting the challenge

1. Re-engineer our networks

With more people (staff and students) using personal web access devices and personal information spaces we need to build our networks to allow these to operate in our institutions.

1a Re-engineer our networks provide our bandwidth to guest devices to access the net.

I’m already seeing many iPhones for example on our system. The objective is to provide a secure internal /institutional network but with some form of guest access to the Internet. One solution on wireless is to guest SSID’s to which guest devices associate and then tunnel them out onto the Internet through web access filters without “touching” our secure networks. Ultimately however the spread of wireless WAN (3G, Wimax) will reduce the need to accommodate guest devices on our own networks.

1b Re-engineer to increase bandwidth and reliability especially for our Internet connections.

Network and Internet access is everything and Internet connectivity will increasingly be seen as the priority. This means that our networks will busier and that we should be increasing bandwidth and reliability to accommodate. Increasingly the “ network is the computer”  and investments in our networks should be prioritised.

2 Re-engineer our Systems

With more people (staff and students) using personal web access devices and personal information spaces and access needed from staff and students in workplaces and other institutions we need to build our systems to allow Internet access and to provide data interfaces for users. We should plan to make it possible for a learner to use their own personal information environment (PIE) to access our systems.

2a Re-engineer systems for Internet access as a priority.

All relevant learning systems should be designed and built Internet first.

2b Re-engineer systems to provide Internet data feeds and interfaces.

All data should have web access and we need to think about interfaces for users and enabling RSS.

3 Re-engineer our physical environment

Recent educational thinking promotes development active learning and soft skills such as research, problem solving, collaboration, communication and information management. The traditional classroom is not a natural environment for this type of activity – we need to develop new learning spaces that are more natural to active styles of learning.

We need to create and support experimental learning spaces in which to develop new teaching ideas. One key ingredient is that learners can change the environment to accommodate new learning – groups work / project work / net access. The other key ingredient is that there is adequate support on hand – technical and educational.

4 Re-engineer our curriculum

Current curricula remind me of trying to fit round pegs (learners) into square holes (colleges) and the problems this causes when increasingly we want round pegs. Current curricula and operation are derived from the 20^th century industrial age – they have fixed time and space slots (lessons) – they have industrial style advantages in terms of quality control and management but present real problems for the active, flexible learning educational reforms being promoted. Curricula change is probably going to be the most difficult problem.  How can we manage and deliver a curriculum where the resources, time and space for various activities change from week to week and where students might pick and choose what to learn.

Re-engineer curricula to be modular

This seems to be necessary to be flexible. For example it would be advantageous to be able to study business modules along with science and arts for example.

Re-engineer more of the curricula to be on-line

This seems to be necessary to be flexible. Timetable clashes might prevent certain combinations but if studied on-line then the restrictions of space and time disappear – we can study wherever and whenever we want and how much or how little we want.

Re-engineer ourselves

Leitch (2006) views the natural resource of the 21^st to be our people and that education is key to developing this resource. Institutions are made of people and ultimately none of the education reforms can happen unless our people (teachers, support, admin, managers and executives) engage with the new paradigm – we need to develop both the mindset and the tools. The mindset is Active, Flexible, Collaborative and Experimental. The tools are those of the NET, including web 2 and social networking.  We need to begin using and experimenting with RSS, Tags, blogs, and groups  for example to enable us to work across traditional boundaries and the boundaries of space and time.

FE – 21st Century Identity Crisis

FE in the 21^st century has been suffering something of an identity crisis – a number of key papers in the last few years have attempted to address the role of FE in a changing world. This blog presents my interpretation of the key elements of these recent papers together with a selective summary of each.

My Interpretation of recent education papers

In a nutshell my interpretation of recent education papers is that they suggest some radical reforms in terms of institutional mechanics and educational practice.

In terms of institutional mechanics they promote the instrumentation and the consumerisation of education through greater measurement and data collection and through the use of market forces and personalisation.  Foster suggests focusing education on economic value and providing the learner with greater choice. The 2006 white paper introduced the ideas demand led learning and learning accounts. The LSC (implementing Leitch) introduces the idea of a competitive learning market.

In terms of educational practice they promote the greater development of “soft skills” such as independent learning, communication and collaboration anticipated to be increasingly necessary for future prosperity.

Key elements for me are

- Developing Focus –

- FE needs to rediscover its roots in applied education (employment and vocation)

- FE needs to develop specialist excellence and economic relevance

- Developing Flexibility and personalisation

- Provide learning access in method, location and time suitable for the learner

- Developing soft skills

- independent research, problem solving, communication, collaboration.

- promote how to learn

Below is my selection of key points from recent education papers

Nov 2005 Foster report:  Review of the future role of FE Colleges

This report provided a statement about the current status of FE and some recommendations for change. I found the recommendations generally quite vague. One of the main conclusions was that “above all, FE lacks a clearly recognised and shared core purpose” and suggested that FE define itself. For me this meant that FE should rediscover its roots and focus on the application of education and skills and link better with the vocational. The report helped kick off the debate about

- Putting the learner at centre of focus and providing greater choice

- Improving the link of learning with economic value

March 2006 – The FE White Paper – Further Education: Raising Skills, Improving Life Chances

The white paper is essential reading and built on the Foster review ideas for defining FE’s role, focusing on employment and learner choice. The white paper introduced the ideas of demand led education. Within the white paper can be found

- A new approach to funding for 14-19-year-olds where more funding is driven directly by employer and learner choice.

- A better focus on employment and vocation – “A clear mission for FE, focused on the employability and progression of learners”. Further development of COVEs, Skills academies, Train to Gain, work based learning and foundation degrees.

- New specialised diplomas

- Learning accounts

- Ideas for personalised learning

- ideas for demand led provision

- Improved links with schools for 14 – 19 programs

- Encouragement for college’s to develop specialist excellence

November 2006 – Rammell – Personalising Further Education: Developing a Vision

From the White Paper ‘Further Education: Raising Skills, Improving Life Chances’ (March 2006) Rammell recognised the importance of learner participation and sought to develop further the ideas of personalisation in education.

The paper is vague about defining what personalisation is but describes the advantages and principles for personalisation. I have pulled out the following quotes to sum up the paper:

“Today, people want the service to be organised around them, not them around it. They want high quality service, tailored to their specific needs and at a time and place convenient for them…” (Blaire)

“Teachers see that technology may be used to deliver the benefits of personalised learning and appreciate the role of technology in enabling differentiation and choice.”

“Personalisation requires a shift in the responsibility between learner and provider. Learning in FE already takes place in a range of settings: in the workplace, online, as well as in the classroom. Where traditionally some teachers or trainers delivered knowledge to passive learners, personalisation fosters negotiation and greater dialogue with learners. We also believe that learners who are more actively engaged in their learning process will also acquire broader, transferable skills – for example self-motivation, independent analytical skills, adaptability and assertive negotiation – that provide a firm base for lifelong learning and are highly sought after by employers.”

“The development of Specialised Diplomas as a modular qualification with young people taking different modules or qualifications in different institutions will present challenges.”

“Offering flexibilities of location, start dates and timing (remote access, workplace and practical learning), facilitated through links with employers, other providers and the wider community.”

 December 2006 – The Leitch review of Skills – Prosperity For All In The Global Economy – World Class Skills

A long and detailed review with an excellent set of references. The review sets the scene for 21^st century education and focuses on the assumed context for 2020. It Extrapolates current technical, economic, demographic trends to predict the skills and the education system needed by 2020.

The context is that of globalisation – global competition and increasing rate of change. Leitch views the natural resource of the 21^st century to be our people and that education is the key to developing this resource. Leitch recommends:

- Attention to basic and skills for life (literacy, numeracy, ICT) an essential foundation.

- Development of service, management, professional and technical skills (e.g. communications, collaboration, research and problem solving)

- Development of demand led approaches to delivering learning (personalisation and choice), the use of learning accounts and a learning “market”

- Development of economic relevance (community and employer engagement)

- Developing a culture of learning (integrating learning with life and work)

 December 2006 –  Implementing Leitch LSC seminar

The LSC describes how it will redefine its role to operate a framework for education by operating a learning market  - The following  quotes sum up the LSC view

 “The LSC will no longer plan with colleges and providers in the way it has done. It will focus on the successful operation of the learning market”.

“The FE system needs to operate in an open and competitive market, driving up quality and delivering more innovative provision. This means moving away from the traditional planning role that exists to delivering through a demand-led system. Coupled with a funding system that reflects customer choice, a demand-led approach will free up the system to respond flexibly to customer demand over time.”

December 2006 The Gilbert Review of education – 2020 Vision

The Gilbert review has had the most influence on me and I thoroughly recommend it as essential reading. If you only read one original paper then read this one.

Like Leitch this looks at the requirements for what is assumed for 2020 but is addresses schools rather than FE. It also highlights personalisation (pupils taking ownership of their learning) and urges the development of soft skills such as communication, collaboration, information management, independent learning, creativity and inventiveness. The following quotes sum up the Gilbert review:

“We believe that personalising learning and teaching must play a central role in transforming England’s education service to achieve these aims between now and 2020.”

“ in the world of 2020 there will be greater access and reliance on technology in conducting daily interactions and transactions. A knowledge based economy and global competition, more complex pathways through education requiring young people to make choices decisions about their education.”

Gilbert advocates

“Engaging pupils as active partners, with responsibility for participating in designing their learning and providing feedback.”

“Using ICT to enhance collaboration and creative learning.”

“Using timetables flexibly to allow, for example, weeks devoted to intensive study or themed project work.”

Establishing curriculum teams of staff and pupils todevelop plans for improving learning and teaching.

Increasing curriculum breadth by delivering some lessons remotely using video conferencing.

Greater use of adults other than teachers to extend the range of skills and support for pupils.

Designing approaches to engaging and raising the achievement of underachieving groups.