The Value of Learning

(CC) Photo by Enoch Lai

I’ve been struggling for quite a few days with a question that has actually been on my mind (and tongue) for quite some time. The question emerged most recently a couple of weeks ago when I was sitting in the only session at the Laptop Institute that I had a chance to actually attend. It was Convincing Your Constituencies by Fort Worth Academy head of school, William Broderick. He skillfully outlined the DOs of selling a 1:1 initiative to teachers, parents and boards — and the DON’Ts.

One of the DON’Ts that Broderick shared, and one of the mistakes he said that his team had made in their initial campaign to promote a 1:1 program at their school, was selling the technology instead of the learning. “Technology” was actually a fairly easy sale. Most people equate computer technology and the Internet with the future and consider technology skills to be synonymous with 21st century skills. The problem came when they started implementing the program. The approach was to teach teachers how to use the computers rather than helping them learn to use this new connective environment to craft and manage effective and relevant learning experiences.

So we say to each other, “Its not about the technology. It’s about the learning.” But even that is not good enough, in my opinion. It Does not sufficiently answer the question, “If it’s not about the technology, then what is it about?”

Certainly, it’s the learning. But what kind of learning? How is the learning different? What is fundamentally new about learning with a computer in front of you, instead of a textbook? ..and perhaps an even more practical question is what does the “teaching” look like?

To answer these questions, I think that it is far more useful to take an approach that I shared today with a group of school administrators from across East Texas. I suggested that rather than wondering how learning might be accomplished with technology, we might, as I often urge people, think about the information. Rather than focusing on the machine, we should explore the new potentials of learning with, and within, an environment of networked, digital and abundant information.

What does learning look like when networking enables us to facility multiple channels of conversation that transcend classroom walls, school campuses, and bell schedules? What does the learning look like when digital information has less to do with something to be taught,and more to do with providing learners with information raw materials that the can shape, mix and remix to construct their own learning? And what does learning look like — for that matter, what does it mean to be educated — when we have increasingly ubiquitous access to increasingly abundant amounts information? The technology is simply the window.

As for the teaching? Well a simple way of expressing this might be the vision of the textbook equipped classroom, with the teacher in the front of the class, leading the way. In a classroom that is equipped with networked, digital, and abundant information, well the teacher stands behind the learner, looking over his shoulder, suggesting questions, provoking conversations, rewarding success and celebrating mistakes, and, expressing the wonder that new learning causes — because she, perhaps, might be learning something new as well.

13 thoughts on “The Value of Learning”

  1. I stopped using the word “teaching” several years ago. I prefer to use “learning” as you described so well. If every educator would focus on “learning” their classrooms and schools would be truly reformed.

    When learning is the focus, the school environment becomes student-centered — what is the student doing, not what is the teaching doing. Students will ask questions that create more questions. They will move from the “right answer” mentality to the inquiry approach. They will have regained their curiosity and be in charge of their own education.

    Love the work you do and hope you get back to Iowa soon,
    Mike

    1. Hi, Mike,

      I agree with what you commented and enjoy your point of teaching and learning relationship.
      “When learning is the focus, the school environment becomes student-centered” it is very true.

      I love learning myself. I have learned something new from your post.

      Thank you very much!

      Joys

  2. Nice post; and Mike’s point about the importance of the language you choose to describe your ideas and concepts, is worth remembering too. I remember Neville Johnstone talking to our staff about that, and the language shift from ‘doing’ the ‘work’ towards learning as the focus. If you can convince teachers that student learning will be enhanced by the shift, they are much more likely to come along with you

    1. I was asked a couple of weeks ago, how we go about convincing our communities that change in education is essential, that a different kind of learning needs to be happening. I suggested that they as people, “How much of what you need to know, do to your jobs today, did you learn sitting in a classroom, listening, and memorizing? ..and how much of it did you learn ‘on the job’?”

      I often ask teacher, to think about what they teach, and whether they learned what they teach in the classrooms as students, or buy planning and teaching it. All adults know that we learn better by doing, not by just listening. The challenge is breaking through the common and nearly intractable vision of what schooling is.

  3. Great point about shifting the focus to what we can do with the technology rather than the technology itself. I know way too many administrators and teachers that fall in love with the idea of having computers for every student in the class, as if it is some sort universal solution to the multitude of problems regarding the modernization of education.

  4. Great post and some food for thought. I believe that new technology can be used very effectively but that we still have a way to go before we can implement new learning concepts fully.

  5. As usual David – well thought out and well said. I have to say that I agree deeply with Mike’s point. A classroom is only partially about what we do as teachers. What is much more important is what they do – our students. Hence the difference between placing an emphasis on teaching or on learning. Using technology allows us to teach differently, but it also allows us all to learn differently. We can access different (and global hopefully) points of view. We can make connections. We can argue. We can disagree. We can use text, images and videos. Different learning needs different teaching.

  6. So much is about students being provided the freedom to develop strategies and a process in seeking out a solution. Through this meaningful and reflective engagements can occur.

  7. Your comments are so incredibly in-sync with an online course I’m presently taking about teaching the Google generation. I’m not of that generation and I find that the pedagogical skills I learned so many years ago – nearly everything that I’ve worked hard to perfect- are essentially obsolete. When incorporating technology into my lesson designs, it’s wise to remember that it’s the information I want to transmit to the students, not the technology.

  8. Ignoring technology completely and just looking at every innovation that has come to education, whether it’s breaking down the standards, block scheduling, 1:1 computing, etc. etc., it all means nothing until it comes to the actual action in the classroom. Without actIon that takes advantage of the innovation we will continue to do what we have always done. Unfortunately our education system seems to be designed on an idea of scale and economic conservation (in terms of cost). There is probably a formula somewhere that shows the comparison of the “physical” cost of a new innovation and the actual cost (implementation, professional development, assessment, etc.) of the innovation when implemented. However, we seem to starve education to the point we barely can afford the initial investment. Without full funding for any of these innovations, the innovations will be marginally successful at best, IMHO.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *