Here are tech terms threatening teachers and public schools and how students learn. When these words or phrases appear, it’s an indication that school district administrators, school board members, or those at the state or federal education levels are embracing an all-technology system, and teachers will play a secondary role in teaching students.
Public schools will no longer look the way they do now. Little proof indicates children will learn better this way.
1. Anytime/Anywhere Learning
Anytime, anywhere learning replaces formal schooling, teachers, and the classroom with mobile instruction through technology.
Both political parties seem in favor of this tech conversion. Republican Education Secretary Betsy DeVos and Democrat Arne Duncan have pushed anytime, anywhere learning. In 2022, while visiting a museum, Education Secretary Miguel Cardona said, “We need to think about anywhere-anytime learning (DeForge).”
It’s what it states. Students can visit museums, outside clubs, or other organizations with laptops, where they’ll find tutors or facilitators to help them if they run into a problem. They won’t have a subject specialist or elementary teacher.
Students might also stay home and learn everything online or attend a cyber school, but those schools will drastically differ from current public schools.
2. Deeper Learning
Deeper learning is associated with whole-child education, with a large part of this technology and data collection.
In 2014, a Harvard report called The Role of Digital Technologies in Deeper Learning by Chris Dede described it as:
- collaborative investigations
- extended inquiries
- apprenticeships
- interdisciplinary projects
- students to discuss and debate complex ideas
- connect academic subjects to personal interests
- confront open-ended, real-world problems
Much of this tries to connect children to their future and careers. It’s not clear how children will learn subject basics.
3. Digital Equity
Providing the poorest students access to digital information is essential. Technology has become a part of life and a helpful tool necessary for learning and most professions. Students needed to connect to their teachers online during the pandemic.
Still, is it equity if children no longer have well-funded public schools with qualified, prepared teachers or an in-person connection to other students?
How will students learn to like each other?
Legislators bemoan the digital divide, but where have they been for teachers and students in their public schools?
4. Personalized Learning
Personalized learning (a term hijacked from special education) is about children facing screens for instruction.
Based on an online assessment, students get lessons aligned to their (personalized) academic level. They punch in answers. If correct, they move forward; if incorrect, they redo until they get the correct response.
This kind of instruction does little to connect students socially. Nor is it the best instruction. It collects online personal data about students, which is a concern.
Other descriptors for personalized learning include:
- competency-based
- autonomy
- purposeful
- differentiated
- student-directed
- proficiency-based
- project-based
- self-efficacy
- interest-driven
- mastery
- individualized
5. Seat Time
Criticizing student seat time promotes anytime, anywhere learning. It’s not to be confused with fighting to give children more recess. It’s important to remember too that students usually sit in front of computers.
The actual claim is that it doesn’t matter how much time students spend in school if the computer collects student information (data) and can demonstrate successful mastery of standardized achievement. But there’s no proof students get a well-rounded education.
Knowledgeworks, an organization awarded $7.4 million from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation in 2007, continues to wield power in promoting this notion.
Here’s how some state legislatures are reconfiguring the kinds of credits students will earn, by changing seat time to transform schools to online learning provided by Knowledgeworks:
- Arizona HB 2862
- Arkansas SB66
- Florida SB 1184
- Minnesota SF 1441/HF 1644
- Montana HB 246
- New Hampshire SB 435
- North Dakota
- Oregon
- Rhode Island
- South Carolina H.3883 and H.3589
- Utah
- Washington SB1599 2019-20 SB 5249
6. Whole Child Learning
Different definitions surround teaching the whole child, but the primary focus involves added responsibility for a child’s health, especially social-emotional learning, and collecting data (it’s a data gold mine) on a child’s behavior. The promise is that this will make children ready for the 21st century.
Whole child learning is related to Deeper Learning discussed above.
If you have something to add about these definitions, please share. I realize this list is incomplete, but this is enough for now.
References
DeForge, J. (2022, March 6). US Education Secretary Miguel Cardona visits Emily Dickinson Museum, Amherst College, to learn about innovative education methods. Mass Live, Retrieved from https://www.masslive.com/news/2022/03/us-education-secretary-miguel-cardona-visits-emily-dickinson-museum-amherst-college-to-learn-about-innovative-education-methods.html.
As a retired special education teacher I recognized a lot of terms as being co-opted from special education and then distorted almost beyond recognition. Tech will continue to churn out new and shiny “objects” to capture attention of people who always have to have the latest gadgets. A consumer society is actually genius because it captures our attraction to novelty, and since it only has to attract us long enough for us to “buy” it, schools are full of obsolete toys that soon lost their luster.
I agree, but I don’t think the luster matters in this case. When the shine disappears, will schools and teachers return?
If they manage to destroy public schools, there won’t be anything to return to. I think it works best for them if they maintain a veneer of support for traditional public schools. After all it is more profitable and easier to sell to an organization than individuals who for some reason do not necessarily fit into data driven cubicles. For some unfathomable reason, a majority of people still like their traditional public schools.
That’s a great point. Thank you!
I would like to suggest a different definition for “deeper learning.” In my teaching, writing, and experience, “deeper learning” is compared with “rote learning.” (I do not associate it with individualized learning.) In many schools/districts today, “deeper learning” is achieved through “project-based learning,” (PBL) in which students, often working in teams, apply their (interdisciplinary) knowledge to investigating and solving real-world problems. I associate PBL with deep comprehension of subject matter and critical thinking because it relies on students applying their understandings and creating new connections, often between disciplines. It is a highly motivating instructional model for many students. Edutopia has some outstanding articles on PBL: https://www.edutopia.org/project-based-learning
I know what you mean, Judi, and I’ve always liked projects. I believe good teachers have always incorporated projects into their lessons. And certainly, students benefit from the tasks and learning you mention. However, PBL is connected to the tech transformation. It is very digital-dependent. It may sound good on paper, often called blended learning, but the teacher’s role is in question. They might feel a part of those projects now, but will they in the future? I know that sounds cynical and I’m sorry but I believe it’s a part of the tech transformation. I also question many reports by Edutopia. Thank you for your comment. Sorry to disagree.
My experience with PBL is not only connected to technology. When school librarians and classroom teachers collaborate for PBL, students will engage with all types of media, including printed books, makerspace tools (both digital and non-digital), and good old-fashioned concrete things/manipulatives as well as technology.
I do not buy that “tech” is intrinsically bad because in 2022, tech permeates every facet of our lives. I can’t be that cynical or feel that helpless. What is needed are educators advocating for students’ privacy and against blanket data harvesting and teaching students how to manage their digital footprints.
School librarians are leaders in these two efforts. See this recent example of solidarity among those who stand firm in protecting students’ privacy and right to read: https://www.themarysue.com/library-follett-destiny-banned-books-backlash/
I repeatedly say tech has a place in schools. Students need to understand how to use it for most careers.
But all the “transformation” talk is about digital learning replacing teachers and public ed.
Check out the book. Disrupting Class: How Disruptive Innovation Will Change the Way the World Learns
I love librarians and school libraries but librarians have lost their jobs and some libraries have been turned into makerspaces. I actually wrote a post about this. Poor schools, might have no library or qualified librarian.
So maybe PBL is working well for now in your school, but what’s in store for the future? Keep me posted. I’ll be curious to hear.
Thanks, Judi, we may disagree but you give my brain a workout!
Also, Absolutely agree with the following!
“What is needed are educators advocating for students’ privacy and against blanket data harvesting and teaching students how to manage their digital footprints.”
“But all the “transformation” talk is about digital learning replacing teachers and public ed.”
If they were honest they would put it in business speak––cost effective and efficient.
There is no doubt that modern technology has made many useful tools available to the schools. I can’t find where Nancy implied that technology is “bad.” That is not the concern. It is how the industry plans to “transform” education. I subbed in a school where kindergarteners were completing a science lesson on tablets! Kindergarten used to be hands on, PBL heaven.
“Poor schools, might have no library or qualified librarian. ”
Already happening in many urban districts. I volunteered in an elementary school that had lost their librarian. They had a beautiful old library lined with shelves of books that never got used, books or room. They did have a computer lab, which was closed for testing more often than not.
I generally enjoy your posts a lot and appreciate your insights. This one gives me pause (though I do NOT disagree that there are hungry corporations out there spending billions on trying to digitize our school systems.) Here in Vermont, we have begin since 2013 to utilize a lot of what you name, however, NOT in the terms of digitizing schools (although in a rural area with great distances between schools and low enrollments, an online course can occasionally be useful). Rather, we have utilized these concepts in the name of insisting that every student has the right to participate in the planning of their own learning and have choices about how they present what they know and can do (personalization), that we are encouraging communities to take an active role in the education of young people (extended learning opportunities), that social learning is seen as very important (and that a false binary exists between personalized learning and social learning). Here there is a widespread skepticism about the data mining of the big software companies, there is an understanding that “deeper learning,” while it many include the factors you list, is NOT about careers, but about more comprehensive subject matter learning as well as genuine hands-on experiences (à la John Dewey, a native son of Vermont, whose ideas are greatly respected here). In this, I agree with the comments of Judi Moreillon (above), who captures the definition employed by the many teachers I know who are fostering “deeper learning.” I would encourage you not to paint with such broad strokes that you miss the nuances of how ideas are differently applied in different places. Vermont is not trying to replace qualified teachers with low cost software; in fact, our current problem is not being able to FIND enough teachers. If you know any who want to live in a beautiful place with a history of progressive education, send them this way.
Thank you for reading my blog, Kathleen. I’ve heard lovely stories about Vermont and their public schools, and the one time I visited there I loved the countryside.
But while public schools may still be progressive, I don’t think they’re immune from digital instruction taking over. It’s a worry the state is struggling to find teachers. That’s a red flag for me.
Also, the idea that children should be in charge of their own learning is concerning. Certainly, every teacher tries to help their students work independently, but how many children do you know that are able to design their own learning (what they don’t know) and teach themselves? They need a computer to do so and then still how do they know what they’re doing?
Also a brief search brought up the following which you’ll likely understand better than me. Both raise concerns in my thinking just skimming. I will try to read both more thoroughly.
But thank you for sharing your observations and keep me posted if you see changes.
https://education.vermont.gov/sites/aoe/files/documents/edu-education-technology-digital-learning-plan-draft-5-3-19-2018-2021.pdf
https://education.vermont.gov/sites/aoe/files/documents/edu-introduction-to-act-77.pdf
I think it’s even more devious than this when paired with the drive to close schools and lower or redistribute funding. The endgame is the top 25% of students at most, probably more like 10-15% will be deemed worthy of attending some sort of “academy” school while the rest of the baggage will be dispositioned to online learning, either at home or warehoused in a gymnasium with “low cost facilitators…delivering standardized content” (Pearson’s exact phrase).
Sadly the public will support this as they love believing their child is special and winning the rat race to get to Ivy League schools.
The blame, shame and insane pressure placed on students to meet all of these “standards” is out of control and I don’t understand why so many teachers defend the use of these products. Even experienced teachers will cite the Renaissance star level as infallible gospel. When you ask if they ever sat with your child and had them read a printed page, they look at you as if you have 3 heads.
Excellent point, Paula! I’m stunned every day to hear teachers praising online reading programs, signing on to the pressure for kindergartners while stating they never learned how to teach reading in their Colleges Of Ed!
In the end it will be the poor students who will lose services.
Thank you!
Thank you for your sanity! It’s been very therapeutic to me as a Momgineer of a 3rd grader that has struggled to move at the pace required. He has 6 days of school left and yesterday had to take 2 accelerated reader tests, start the IReady Diagnostic, started a 3rd accelerated reader test and had a timed multiplication and division test.
When I arrived for pickup, groups of his classmates were all eagerly asking each other their II ready diagnostic score. This is not normal or useful for anyone!
Third grade? Unbelievable! And iReady no less. Conditions never seem to improve I’m afraid. I am sorry for your child and you. I hope you can both enjoy summer and put school behind you.
Thanks for the good read! My thoughts:
#1. A false concept if there ever was one in the sense that humans are always learning. . . and forgetting. The question being what do we want students to learn (and maybe not forget) and who controls what is learned?
#2. Deeper learning? How deep is the deep end? Another BS term used to make the teaching and learning process into something it isn’t and can’t be. Deep learning is to master all the skills and knowledge needed to be a “master” of a trade, job, art, craft, etc. . . and is very specific to a particular area. As a master upholsterer I need to have the skills and knowledge of many different aspects of making upholstered goods. It takes a minimum of 3-5 years of actually doing all the aspects of upholstery to be a master upholsterer. Same with teaching. It takes a minimum of 5-10 years to be a master at the craft and art of teaching. We are expecting the impossible to think that students can master “deep learning.”
#3. There will never be digital equity as long as we rely on a capitalistic economic system. Inequality is built into the system.
#4 The purposefully misleading “personalized learning” is nothing more than a Pavlovian/Skinnerian nightmare that is less than adequate for a true teaching and learning environment.
#5 Yes, seat time matters. See my response on what it takes to master a trade, art or other activity. One has to put in the time to properly learn, there is no shortcut especially through supposed technological means.
#6 Whole Child Learning? Is that like whole wheat bread? What does WCL mean and who determines the curriculum?
Fancy buzz words/concepts that the vast majority of adminimals soak up, repeat and force implementation onto the teachers who know that what they are being told to do is a crock.
I love this! Thank you, Duane. You write well and speedily. It’s very much appreciated.
Well stated Duane
Thank you for the article! I would add “21st Century Learning” and “1:1 devices”. As a former teacher, librarian, and technology advisor, I recognize the benefit of technology in education BUT oftentimes the vision is different than the reality. Politicians and school boards love to say we’re preparing our students for the 21st century, but no one really specifies exactly what that means. Typically, it involves giving every student a Chromebook and mandating teachers to use them, with some small attempts at tech PD. Unfortunately, the vast majority of teachers are either largely unprepared for using 1:1 technology in their classroom, or they are simply too overwhelmed by large class sizes, piles of administrative paperwork, and the every changing mandates which is used to micro-manage their teaching,
The utopia of a “21st century classroom” quickly becomes the reality of 21st century teaching. The devices are used to replicate what could easily be done on paper (which, in some cases, resemble little more than simplistic worksheets.) Management of devices becomes a chronic issue, at times making student behavior worse. (To remedy this, schools resort to surveillance software which can be legally and ethically questionable.) Parents suddenly face invoices for up to $100 for damages to their child’s device, and such items as charger cords and cases are constantly lost or damaged (which is billed as well.) Lost chargers and students forgetting to charge their devices adds another headache for teachers. If the teacher is only limited to 500 pages of copy paper a year, there are no paper copies for these students, and if the teacher is not given an extra device? Well…..just another day teaching in the 21st century.
There are some great uses of technology out there though. The key word is “usage.” A teacher needs to be knowledgeable enough about technology and willing to devote a fair amount of time to learn and adapt lessons. I have made the suggestion many times that if a district or school wants to adopt 1:1, first they should implement a voluntary adoption for teachers that choose the tech, and that these teachers are then used as mentors for other teachers who voluntarily wish to try integrative technology in their classroom. Give stipends to these teachers and give them time to meet and collaborate. But stop with the all-or-nothing top-down mandates.
Shelley,
I meant to respond yesterday to your comment because it is excellent, and you bring up a good point about the tech being like simplistic worksheets. Also, not getting teachers on board or knowing how to use it.
You present many thoughts about why technology isn’t working well and how it should be working better.
I forgot to comment because I clicked your name and started reading YOUR BLOG POSTS, and you have so many good ones I forgot to come back here.
So, thank you for taking the time to comment!
Thanks so much Nancy.
The vast majority of K to 12 public-school students have been fully influenced by standards based, test-and-punish “reform’ and the Invasion of the Chromebooks. Ask the average middle or high school student how many of their teachers actually teach. Their answers will reveal at how close the tech sector is in capturing their prize.
It’s sad. Thanks for sharing, Rick. You write the truth.
I found the following excellently stated, and there’s some hope revolving around the FTC and changes in COPPA. I’m learning that combining the data and more transparency could make a positive difference. Fingers crossed.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/medialse/2022/05/18/algorithmic-personalization-is-disrupting-a-healthy-teaching-environment/
Unfortunately, the adoption of Chromebooks are justified (mistakenly) as a way to advance “equity.,” but from what I’ve experienced, low income students are more likely to be using laptops to complete activities that involve lower level thinking skills vs higher order open ended activities. The lower the test scores of a school, the more likely they will use these types of programs in order to prep students to raise schools (albeit temporarily.)
Shelley,
I just responded to your comment from yesterday. It was much appreciated.
And once again you nail it! The term equity is so overused by those selling online programs. And also by those who are incredibly wealthy and don’t have to pay their fair share of taxes, but think they know how schools should be run.
Thanks again!
A year or so ago I heard a description of how the brain actually works that has acted as somewhat of an epiphany for me (Sadly, I do not remember the source of the comment). As I understood the comment, the mass we consider the brain in our cranium is more like an operation center that manages the rest of our brain, the body. The synapsis and neurons in our cranium are distributed throughout the body. The problem with our current technological application is that they all target the brain in our skull while ignoring the brain throughout our person. I did not start out as a student motivated to complete the tasks assigned in the typical classroom. However, I was always fascinated with the environment around me and physical tasks. I loved to work with my hands and had an aptitude for accurate rendering through drawing which I began to understand as artistic expression. This kick started my intellectual curiosity and later success in school. I later came to believe, as an artist and art teacher, that my hands were part of the problem solving mechanism that was required for higher level critical thinking. By manipulating material of all sorts I discovered problems and how to solve them. In too many circumstances we in education have abandoned the use of our hands as a means to enhance our intellectual prowess. Over dependence on sitting in front of screens for information bypasses the activity necessary to fully internalize intellectual reasoning. I find it ironic that many of the Silicon Valley executives profoundly limit screen time for their children. I know of many accomplished private independent schools where the maker space is now the focus of the school for grades k-8. The wow factor of new technology acts as the shiny object to attract attention but cannot be allowed to dismiss the foundational process of learning. Our hands are part of our brains. Using them to type on a keyboard cannot substitute the evolutionary process of manipulating various materials for intellectual development.
Thank you, Paul. I think what you described is truly education of the whole child.
With over 2 billion in textbook spending and another billion in testing, education has become a cash cow. The industries around education must continuously create new ideas to generate income. Lack of equity means I don’t have enough money to pay for either enough books or accurate testing. The failure of some school boards to reign in these escalating costs creates the perception of a weak academic program. Charter schools who attempted to rescue schools in many areas frequently fell short and proved no better than their counterparts in public education. Personally, I have stopped using equity to address learning.in any capacity.
I recognized a student’s behavior was the overriding reason for poor academic performance and that to improve their academics something had to change in their behavior. In addition I promote a students understanding of their cognition as a means to remedy any shortfalls. Finally, mastery of any subject requires a degree of competency which will not happen by listening to a lecture.
Thanks, Vicente. Interesting perspective. I’m sorry you’re not getting the resources you need.
Nancy, what do you know about the MAPS reading assessment for kindergarten children? There are three 30- minute assessments on a computer, the child wearing headphones. This seems insane to me. Not developmentally appropriate. Is there any research on the validity of MAPS assessments for 5-year-olds? The assessment will also be used a a state-mandated dyslexia screening.
I believe MAPS is from NWEA which is often cited about how far children have fallen behind due to the pandemic. I don’t believe you’re alone in your questioning MAPS.
https://www.nwea.org/map-growth/?gclid=CjwKCAjw4ayUBhA4EiwATWyBrs7NSJvPiWBIes2U7HFET5zyuvIDn4856Mkhn9qY1fAZF47JgBCmMhoCAGEQAvD_BwE
Oh, so now they’re moving into dyslexia screening? Thanks for mentioning this. I’ll look into it.