The Revolution Will Be Crowded

According to Thomas Friedman, there’s a revolution coming in post K12 education and he uses this “rather charming” explanation from Andrew Ng, associate professor of computer science at Stanford and cofounder of the online course delivery company Coursera, to illustrate his point.

“I normally teach 400 students,” Ng explained, but last semester he taught 100,000 in an online course on machine learning. “To reach that many students before,” he said, “I would have had to teach my normal Stanford class for 250 years.”

Friedman raves about this approach, saying that it would give more students access to “quality higher education” at a cost that’s much lower than the fast-rising price of attending in person.

He also marvels that this would “enable budget-strained community colleges in America to “flip” their classrooms” by having students watch recordings of “the world’s best lecturers on any subject”.

However, is that what people want from a college education? Can you call what Ng does “teaching”, or is it more about managing a large group of self-directed learners? For someone who isn’t self-directed, is the only alternative then accumulating a pile of student loans?

As someone who wasn’t thrilled by most of my undergraduate classes in college and actually likes self-directed learning, this is not judgement, just questions.

I also wonder, just as college-level classes were pushed down into high school in the form of the AP program, when will this type of massive approach to instruction arrive for us here in K12?

A district accountant somewhere is probably already thinking that one teacher working with only 150 kids per year sounds awfully expensive.

Is That The Only Option?

This past weekend, the New York Times posted a very long but interesting look at the growing debt being accumulated by recent college graduates, as well as those who dropout. It’s a good overview that touches on some of the major problems, including deceptive advertising (aka recruiting) and the somewhat shady for-profit college industry.

However, I was struck by a comment made by one member of the state House of Representatives in Ohio, who also happens to be a current college student with lots of loans: “students need to understand that attending college is not an entitlement”.

Maybe not. But if you look at it through the eyes of most high school students and their parents, we’ve made college attendance something of a societal inevitability.

First you have politicians from the president on down setting increased college attendance and graduation as vital to rebuilding the nation’s economic structure. It’s a matter of world competition! The Obama administration has established a goal to make the United States “first among developed nations in college completion”. Even many of those legislators voting to cut support to both students and schools also support the same argument.

Then there is the culture and structure of our K12 schools where, at least in this area, the message is drilled into the kids almost from the first day of Kindergarten that the only goal worth pursuing after graduation is college. Almost everyone gets funneled into a “college prep” schedule with no consideration for any other post-high school path, and certainly little for the interests and needs of the individual.

So, what’s the choice? Skip college and miss getting that “good job” (not to mention being considered a “failure” by the popular culture) or go and be saddled with a huge debt, even if you “settle” for a state school.

If we as a society really believe that a college degree is something that will benefit both the country in the long run and almost every high school graduate, then we have an obligation to cover the fundamental costs. You cannot reconcile a societal norm of every kid going to college while slashing the support to make that happen. 

Of course, as with everything else we think is important, that’s going to take money. Not to mention some major restructuring in the way that colleges and universities do business (and higher education is very much a business), starting with separating out the stuff that has little to do with getting a good education (high profile athletic programs that are little more than pro farm teams leap to mind first).

But if “college for all” is just political talk, if our “leaders” are not willing to make some hard budget choices to make it happen, then let’s stop feeding that illusion to our kids. Instead, provide students with multiple options and help them find other, less expensive and possibly more satisfying, avenues to follow after high school graduation.

Actually, that second option is a excellent one anyway.

People Behaving Badly, Facebook or Not

With the start of graduation season, Ars Technica recently offered a world-wide round up of people-behaving-badly-on-Facebook stories, all linked in some way to kids and schools.

We have the principal masquerading as a girl on the social networking site to keep tabs on his students. And the online fight that spilled out into the real world in the form of a physical assault at school. Plus an assortment of attempts to legally restrict kids and/or adults based on perceived online threats. With a teacher-posting-stupid-things story thrown in for good measure.

It’s certainly a provocative collection of stories, the kind your local “film at 11″ local news might present to goose ratings by stirring concerns about kids and/or teachers using social media (and maybe already has).

Of course, these incidents involve fewer than a dozen participants in Facebook’s 700,000+ community and the writer of the article ends with the conclusion the big media outlets should also arrive at.

Social media can go wrong in so many ways for students, teachers, and administrators, yet it can also be a terrific tool for bringing communities together and for strengthening relationships. And most of the issues here have analogues in the “grown-up” world of employer/employee relationships, and another set of analogues when it comes to government and intelligence agency use of social media posts to spot fake marriages, monitor “chatter,” and even ban people from entering the country.

In other words, technology is not the problem. Without Facebook, these same people would find other channels in which to act stupidly, although probably not with as much transparency.

Personal Tech

One of the conclusions from a new study of computer use says that “[i]n the next five years, tablets will displace notebook-style computers to become the dominant personal computing platform.”

I wonder if the word “displace” shouldn’t be replaced with the word “supplement”?

Based on my personal, very not-research-based experience, the functionality of my iPad has developed grown over two years so that these days my laptop usually remains on my desk while the tablet goes with me for most daily activities.  I still have a desktop machine at home (an old Mac Mini) but it now exists only to store and serve media and files. I expect that once the capabilities and reliability of all those many clouds improve, that unit will become unnecessary.

So, for me at least, the laptop has become the desktop and the tablet is the portable device, pulling into the same relationship the laptop and desktop had a few years ago. For a while, the convenience of the laptop was nice but it didn’t have all the power and features needed for some tasks. That changed over time and my laptop is now a complete desktop replacement.

The same will happen with tablets and whatever lightweight, portable communications devices are coming (Google glasses anyone?).

As part of this evolving world of portable devices, the research company speculates about something they call “frames” which would act like wireless docking stations.

Frames will be large, stationary displays that a person can use to wirelessly show video, documents and any other tablet-based content. They’ll be laden with sensors, so people can interact with them through touch, voice and gestures (via motion sensors similar to those in Microsoft’s Kinect).

Forrester envisions frames as fixtures in homes, offices, hotel rooms, coffee shops and conferences. Forrester analysts expect them to reach the mass market in 2015, when they will spark an acceleration in the displacement of laptops.

Conference centers and offices maybe but I really don’t want to show the whole coffee shop what I’m working on.

Anyway, I sometimes use a bluetooth keyboard with my iPad but I’m not sure I see the point of having a whole setup like this in a fixed location. If these frames are coming I certainly hope they are better than the physical docking stations for current laptops. For a while, everyone in our offices wanted one, until they discovered just how badly they worked, not to mention being incompatible with the next model computer they received.

In the end these predictions sounds like a report for IT managers in businesses, not a reflection of how most people seem to want to use portable devices. It certainly doesn’t sound like my experience, but then I’m probably not reflective of the audience the research company is trying to reach.

Recovering From Failure

The New York Times Learning Network blog has an interesting lesson on the topic of failure, with some good examples from sports, business, the arts and other fields.

It also asks students to consider some interesting questions about failure in their own lives and those of people they know.

Can failure be useful? Can you think of examples, from your own life or someone else’s, when it has led to something positive?

How is failure defined and dealt with in your family, your school, the activities you do outside of school, among your friends and in your community? Which of those definitions and responses to failure seem fairest or best to you? Why?

What can be done to avoid failure? Should people try to avoid it?

What is “failure” and what is “success”? Who decides?

Missing, however, is any real consideration of failure as it applies to school. What happens if you fail the midterm in English 7? What recovery options do you have for getting a bad score on the SOLs?* Suppose you get a 1 on an AP test?

We really don’t deal well with the concept of failure in school, especially in helping students learn from it and discovering options for recovery. Maybe in sports, possibly the arts or other “non-academic” contests. But for most kids, failing a class or a grade means they will repeat it.

But the most likely scenario is that they get to cover the same content, often using the same materials and teaching techniques, often in the compressed time frame of summer school. And usually with only slightly better results, not anything we might call “success”.

Doing the same thing in the same way hoping for different results.

Is that how people recover from failure in real life?


*For those outside of Virginia, that’s the acronym for our spring standardized tests.