My friend, Eric Langhorst, (seriously check out his classroom web site) posted a comment on yesterday’s blog entry, The Next Story. It’s a common lament of educators, but it got me to thinking. Read his post first.
I am frustrated about the lack of willingness to take “risks” in terms of a dynamic change in the way we teach our students. I do feel a glimmer of hope when I think of what has been done in Maine with the 1 on 1 program and today I saw mention of a plan to give laptops to all 7-12 students in South Dakota. One of the biggest things that troubles me is that students today in many cases are using web 2.0 tools to live and participate in live outside of the classroom. School is becoming another hoop that some of these gifted students must jump through before they move on to the next step in their life. Is that really what we want school to become? – a meaningless hoop that must be “endured” to get on with other things?
OK, so we need to change. But why.
Organisms change. They adapt to new conditions — or they become extinct.
So how has our climate changed? Why are we so excited about Maine’s initiative and other pockets of innovation? Is it the technology, or does it precisely address specific needs? If so, what are those needs? If we can identify a core set of new conditions, that can be universally acknowledged, then we might be able to wrap more compelling ideas around them for affecting change.
What do you think? What’s changed?
Compiling a List:
- Access to information (Eric Langhorst)