What Drives Change in Education?

We, you and I, are always rambling on about the latest thing. Don't deny it. You may be attracted to doctrine, strategy, or tactics but every one of us is a devotee of something. The object of this post, is to point out our common myopia about education. As with other examples of the effects of myopia, results can run from minor stumbles to falling off a cliff Magoo-style in pursuit of something that attracts us.

Is there a practical model hidden somewhere? Yes, it's at the end. It's about virtuous software development and you'll have to actually get the point of the post for it to be useful to you.

Many of us think the education enterprise may be "more or less independent" of outside effects. A good example is the idiocy of education policy that ignores the effects of poverty, or rather pretends it is powerless to change, but can magically waive poverty's power over children using magical passes. Thus, we may decide that a change such as increasing the number of hours spent in a discipline is an effective intervention or changing the ownership of school infrastructure could be effective. My state's leadership likes that one. I think the point of this last paragraph was that we are poking and probing a poorly understood system. Policymakers have been hoodwinked into thinking there will be results that are not unexpected.

Warning: midstream metaphor change. As with our oceans, there are changes taking place that are overwhelmingly important, but nearly invisible to us distracted by the the ripples, waves, thermoclines and tides. We are in the midst of a scientific revolution based on the democratization of information. The effect accelerates discovery. In addition to affecting the enterprise of science, the information revolution is affecting education. This much is painfully obvious and I hope you don't suppose this is about something trivial as technology in schools. It isn't.

The broad effects of the information revolution point toward globalization of the economy, global health changes, the manufacture and distribution of goods - as well as science. But its effect on education is critical to the advancement/acceleration of science itself. They are intertwined and I wil spare you yet another lousy metaphor, leaving it at that.

This much is clear. In order for science to continue to open its embrace, education must further democratize/open. Any movement toward narrowing access violates the doctrine of democratization. In science, we have settled on "Open Science" as a stated goal. Anything that isn't traveling in that direction is mistaken.

So Magoo... What drives education? The same thing that is driving change all around. Please resist "monetizing"efforts and pour resources into open education. We don't want a repeat performance of the record industry in education.

Here's the link I promised upstairs:
Ten Simple Rules for the Open Development of Scientific Software

High Stakes Testing

Regarding measurement of learning, I tend to be of the J. Gould camp. (Like you didn't know already.) But if there is a huge natural variance in humans, there could also be a huge variance not in what people know (obvious), but HOW people know.

Furthermore, it is possible that folks involved in measurement conflate the two, dismiss the difference, or miss it to one side or the other precisely because it is a moving target.

In order to get to information stored in another's brain - stored in an idiosyncratic fashion - a strict path cannot work in 100% of cases. Let's say I ask my class to reflect on why something is generally true. Nobody can answer, so I work backward from it and repeat the question till somebody gets it. Then I reflect on whether I left out a key bit of context or if the students were unable to make the connection I asked of them. BUT sometimes I am surprised by what they think and how they think it.

This doesn't happen often, but it may be happening more often than we think which is what makes me think my examination of student's knowledge isn't very good.

Supporting this is the social observation that people just don't make allowances for the way other people who are equally knowledgeable see things. Sure there is emotional investment, but there are inevitable differences of opinion engendered by what we call viewpoint. Am I saying viewpoint is a lot more dangerous than we suspect in testing? That makes me wonder about professors who give credit for well-argued opposing viewpoints.

Glen McGhee pointed out Ray and Mickelson's paper: "Students "read reality with more care than they read textbooks" (14, also 11-12) "Part of their world is the realm of work ... they observe their adult kin grappling with the financial difficulties ..." Applies now to college students, too."

This is a simple fact of viewpoint. Students want to work and react with what they think is appropriate strategy. Business leaders react in dismay, thinking students are out of touch with reality.

Comedy American Enterprise Institute-Style

Charles Murray speaking about evaluation of Charter Schools in the New York Times.

Ok, so charter schools are not a school reform technique anymore. Poof! But why blame it on testing? Sure in England, schools are boycotting state sponsored high stakes tests. Sure they're ineffective because when you constantly measure people, they adjust their behavior in very distinct ways. But heck, that's not why charter schools aren't special.

Murray goes on to rhapsodize over his ideal charter school's curriculum, bemoaning the probability that his students wouldn't do better than students at competitor's schools. Here is what Murray misses. Testing doesn't miss the wonderful warm goodness-filled charter education any more than it misses anything else.

Larry Cuban has a wonderful explanation of what is really happening. There is no one best way of schooling youth is what he concludes based on evidence from prior to the Second World War. Today, Charles Murray discovered something quite similar, but took home quite a different conclusion.

Do You Value Freedom of Religion and Constitutional Rights?

I need to show you guys something. Not too long ago, I started getting fan requests for viewing a video at FaceBook on putting Christ BACK in schools. I want to point out the intellectual legacy of this idea. It is distinctively anti-government in a way that should be disturbing to people who value the Constitution.

Please visit the Founding Father of Home Schooling, R. J. Rushdoony on this youtube page:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPOrKVU_0dw
Read about his theories of governance:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rousas_John_Rushdoony

And you may conclude with me that in order to confirm his paranoid bias, he reinvented history.

In addition to creating home schooling and (wanting to) demolish the legal system of the United States, he directly inspired murder. How much nicer can a guy get? Does he invite direct comparison to any radical muslim clerics you know?

Here is piece produced for a religious audience. Christian Reconstructionism By Dr. Bruce Prescott - Interfaith Alliance forum on Religious Extremism - Westminster Presbyterian Church April 11, 2002
http://www.mainstreambaptists.org/mob4/dominionism.htm

What I find interesting is the direct explicit intent to establish control in Republican organizations.

This is a Rushdoony legacy foundation link to a page of readings for the advancement of LIBERTY!
http://www.chalcedon.edu/articles/article.php?ArticleID=464
Which I find funny since they wish to eliminate the structure of the government.

In closing, I presume you may be aware that Christ was never in schools in the first place. If you have any ideas to the contrary, don't consider looking at anything but the American Bar Association's page on it. I have put several links into this post already. Find it yourself. :-p

Blogging in Class

If you had asked me a while back if blogging in class was going to be an issue, I would have said no.

Now, maybe.

If it's reflective in nature because of interest in class discussion, it's great. I guess it's a gauge of interest like twittering.