Becoming irrelevant to the conversation

I went to a conference this week. Sandwiched in between all of the traditional money hysteria and legislative updates there was an interesting (and frightening) presentation. Will Richardson spoke about technology (specifically the internet), how it affects student learning, and how it is transforming every aspect of our lives.

The web has evolved from a repository of information into what is termed Web 2.0-the read/write web. It is increasingly easy for anyone to not only get data from the internet, but also to post information there (witness this creation) through blogs or wikis. The burning question is--what are schools going to do to keep up? It is no longer a question of "if" change is happening, but "how" change is happening. Will we be proactive or reactive to this change?

Imagine a policeman with a radar gun. The car going past at 100 mph is business and the car going by at 5 mph is education. The issue is that if we don't change we are going to become irrelevant--our students will find other places to learn and other methods. We are faced with the dilemma of having students that grew up immersed in technology being taught by faculty that, for the most part, doesn't understand technology and often wind up fighting against it. Students are open to, and embrace, new ways of learning but schools mostly do not. What are the main issues?

1) As educators, we must change our focus from being the dispensers of information, to teachers of how to find information. While there are many skills that will still need to be taught (like reading), there are just as many more that need to be eliminated from our curriculum. Students can (and need to) learn the concept of the United States, but do they still need to memorize state capitols? I don't know them, and if I did need to know--I would google it.

2) Once students can find the information, our main task should be teaching them how to discern good from bad, and how to make judgments based on that data. The very nature of the web, and the overwhelming amount of data, means that we need to teach how to evaluate that information if it is to be meaningful.

3) Technology needs to be more than just the latest computers with the newest version of software. The discussion should include blogs, wikis, social networking, podcasting, and other options.

4) Our response to most technology has been to ban it, for various reasons. So, instead of teaching pupils how to have a MySpace page and be responsible about it, we leave them to their own designs. Why? It's probably easier that way. Instead of teaching them how to use social media, we are afraid it is using them.

5) It is a flat (rural) world. Technology has all but erased the boundaries between the haves and have nots. We now can do just about everything the bigger, wealthier, schools can do. As a matter of fact, we have the advantage as we don't have the levels of bureaucracy that big districts have. No more excuses.

6) We must begin to think of schools less in terms of physical places, and less in terms of conventional delivery of instruction. They need to become fluid in content and delivery, taking into account all types of learners and learning.

7) The surprising (to most people) fact is that students would prefer less technology in the classroom (especially participatory technologies that force them to do something other than sit back and memorize material for a regurgitation exercise).

8) Where does NCLB, standardized testing and "accountability" fit in this debate and preparing kids for a technological future? Nowhere that I can see.

We are entering (or have already entered) an era when students of all ages can learn from anyone at anytime, anywhere in the world. It is time for schools to accept this fact and adapt or become irrelevant in the future.