I totally agree that the program is a core example of the change that must come and I am so heartened that such a program now exists. I hope that it is only the first of many and that the learning, innovation, collaboration and transformation that is being invited truly grows roots in the ground and has widespread systemic impact. Many hearts and minds are needed on this front.

I smile as I’m in the process of applying for Harvard’s new Doctorate in Education Leadership and am holding these questions that you all are posing as I try to translate my vision and personal learning into language and imagery that takes into account the history and present need of the system while makes room for the emergence that is happening and opportunities for genuine and lasting learning to occur for all children in our country. (can’t use sentences like that on the application!)

And… at this very moment I’m taking a break from studying for the GRE… trying to tame my begrudging responses that laugh at what a ridiculous waste of time this is (studying for GRE) when my true interest is in transforming the education system, making direct contact with individuals and learning communities… and how this test demonstrates very little, if anything, about me, my learning, my vision, and my ability to create, take action and invite change!

Thank you for this inspiring (and venting) break!

What I speculated is that reading and math seem to be common skills needed across learning. Okay, then I found that Northwest Evaluation Assn can show any learner where she/he is on steps 1 through 230 with reading and math. No learner that I’ve worked with — if you show her/him that she/he is at step 48 in their pattern recognition and here are the skills of step 49 — can resist getting into that step 49. If you show them step 22 or step 134 then they shrug and turn away.

Education can meet each learner at each next step in each personalized trek. We know how to do that. Each day we choose not to do it.

jb

The key issue that I have witnessed through my mother that ultimately impedes progress is that of assessment. You began your article, I imagine purposefully, on this very issue.

“How do we know that’s the right design? Where has this worked before?”

We live in a very goal-oriented society and this is reflected in how we measure the success of our educational programs. Standardized testing is ubiquitous at all levels of instruction (SOLs, SATs, defined curricula). What you suggest in personalized learning I see as akin to a form of emergence, where educators will set the stage for learning and allow the students to seek their own truths. In this regard, the teacher’s role shifts from instructor to advisor. The student gains more responsibility for their own learning and must, to some degree, define and monitor their own progress. This method could provide great benefit with a motivated student AND teacher. However, how do we prevent attrition in this new system that will be caused by unmotivated students and detached teachers? That is how do we know when we’re “losing” our students to indifference in time for someone to step in and take corrective action?

I would love to take the position that we know how our children learn, so let’s just do it the right way without regard to the inept measures that are currently in place. However, I don’t think we can make the sweeping changes to our educational system unless we tackle the issue of assessment. It just won’t fly politically. The group of engineers designing the internal combustible engine risked their company for a chance at leading a revolution. I think our lawmakers, on the other hand, will tend towards risk-averse over pioneer.

Thanks for the article – I think much of this is common sense, unfortunately common sense is not so common.

Doug