Dewey A Reflection on the Inevitable

Dr. Tom ButlerDr. Duff Rearick

Published byThe Pennsylvania Leadership Development Center

2016(All rights reserved)

1

Forward

In 1938 John Dewey wrote his classic book Experience in Education (Touchstone 1938). In 2012 Chuck Schwahn and Bea McGarvey wrote Inevitable (e-book 2012). Each work, although some 75 years apart builds upon an idea that to be effective in a post modern era schools or education as we know it must transform.

The works of the authors focus on a premise, a call for an education purpose and values built upon experience, interest and personal accountability. Each work emphasizes the necessity of student agency in the learning process. Each work contends that our current system of education is neither designed nor intended to serve the individual child - the learner.

This Pennsylvania Leadership Development Center (PLDC) publication is intended as bridge between progressive thought in 1938 and the mass customized learning (MCL) movement of 2016. Tom Butler and Duff Rearick have a history of customizing learning opportunity. They translate the work of Dewey through this lens in an effort to challenge thinking as we enter a new era in history.

Dewey a Reflection on the Inevitable is intended as a mirror to the current and challenge to the future. It is not a book report. As your curiosity grows we encourage you to read Experience and Education and Inevitable. The sole intent in the following pages is to challenge your thinking and through that to stimulate ideas.

Tom and Duff, along with other PLDC consultants have extensive experience in leading education transformation. These individuals are inspired by the moral imperative that every child, regardless of situation deserves the best learning experience we can provide each day in every way. We, at PLDC, are convinced that our current modern industrialized system of education is not up to the task of meeting this challenge.

The fascinating outcome of this unique work is its link the past; the why of experienced based education and to the future of mass customizing learning opportunity for every child. For this reason we offer Dewey A Reflection on the Inevitable free to all.

Pat Crawford Executive Director PLDC

Executive Director Mass Customized Learning Mid-Atlantic Consortium

May 2016

2

How to use this reflection:

You will discover in this reflection our reactions to Dewey’s work chapter by chapter.

We wrote independent of each other. This decision was intentional. Our goal was a challenging open-ended perspective on experience-based education.

Each chapter begins with an abstract on Dewey’s ideas followed by our thoughts. Why now after all Experience and Education has been around since 1938. Simply put, we attempt to bridge Dewey to the present in a effort to show that new really is not new at all.

Our reflections stand-alone and are not intended as book report on Experience in Education. What we propose is to use Dewey’s work as a base to challenge your thinking. We believe that what is written is not nearly as important as your thoughts and ideas as you read. You are encouraged to write down those fleeting ah ha moments and in time reflect back.

It fascinates us that as we rail against being institutionalized, forced to a one size fits all way of educating we continue to be confronted with one question, “How do you do this thing, customizing.” In truth, no one is blessed with the answer for every context is different. We believe guiding principles exist and are available through the Mass Customizing National Alliance.

These principles are guides. They cannot possibly reflect the unique aspects of your culture. It is critical then that you the leader have the courage to dream, to inspire and to translate new ideas. If you believe that a transformation is necessary then the impetus to change is up to you regardless of your role.

If you are reading this you are a leader. Whether you are a teacher desiring to customize a classroom, a parent wanting something better for your child or a superintendent pondering the idea of transforming your culture the ideas we share can be of value to your thought. As you read our reflection on Dewey and study the principles of customizing, we encourage you to dream about the possibility for the children you serve. We implore you to aspire to that which can be, should you choose.

Through out the narrative we mention the names of teachers and leaders. These brave individuals are real breathing human beings working in classrooms and schools in very diverse settings. We thank them for providing us with inspiration and the willingness to let us use their name.

Tom and DuffMay 2016

3

Prologue

In 1938 John Dewey recognized that our modern era was terminal and that change was inevitable. His premise was based upon a litany of historical record and a sense that the structure of our education system was inadequate for the future. He was right although as with most philosophers’ way ahead of his time. We now find ourselves in the midst of another shift from the modern industrialized era to post-modern age of information. This shift warrants another look at experienced based learning.

This transformational reality, this shift in era is a journey that will change us whether we like the idea or not. Generally, as evidenced in the history of all cultures, these revolutions begin with dream and morph into something else. The journey is long and arduous. Transitions are not quick. We need look no further than the work of Nelson Mandela or Dr. Martin Luther King to see clear evidence that transformation is slow.

Dewey’s idea is eloquently simple and practically difficult. His progressive thought requires a change in thinking about children, teachers, parents, learning and structure. Most of his premise is a about transitioning from a value of control to a focus on the individual learner whether adult or child. All of the current political and social forces resist this reality. As we witness through out history giving up control is a very difficult pill to swallow.

We find it intriguing that Dewey recognized this phenomena right after one world war and just before another. He recognized the need for educational transformation as our country recovered economically and as it became increasingly isolated. His premise was intended to move a culture by engaging the children differently in an effort to better mold a better future.

As Dewy wrote a contemporary recognized the immense impact of educating children through control. Adolf Hitler articulated that by controlling the education system you gained influence trough the minds of children. It followed that if you influenced the minds of the children the culture would shift, a different value system would be embraced. The influence he utilized was rote and controlled. Several million people died and untold suffering occurred because he recognized the value of the manipulating the how and what of learning. An entire generation was taught not to think but rather to be obedient. He valued education his way and it was dangerous. Have we been following a similar and hopefully less dangerous path? One can only wonder and wait.

Why resurrect Dewey now? After all this is 2016 some 77 years after Dewey wrote Experience and Education. We sense a tremor, a hum of revolution in education from what it is to something else. The question begs as to what the future holds. We recognize new is often reflected in the past.

As Solomon wrote in Ecclesiastes there is nothing new under the sun. Our fascination with this new phenomenon of customized learning, experienced based

4

learning or progressive thought is not - new. What is new is the motivation for change.

There is little doubt that we are somewhere in the midst of a cultural shift. Our modern era is serving us well or perhaps served us well. Control, analysis, predicted success, scalable ideas, cloned concepts, sorting and separating people characterize it. We are who we are because if this reality. But is it worthy of our future.

Driven by normal pressures accelerated by technology and inter-connectedness we find ourselves educating children for the past as opposed to the future. Although none can be certain it is credible thinking that this new post- modern era is to be characterized by creativity, adaptability and flexibility. We are destined to greater connectivity worldwide and to become more pluralistic. The current political retreat is a normal reaction to a momentum forward that cannot be stopped.

Learning must shift of that we are convinced. This reality is driven by mathematical fact. A child born today is destined to live and in some cases work into the 22nd century well into a postmodern era.

Yet, we grow children and adults in a system driven by old habits, urban legend and control. There is little real law or fact that prevents our education system from transforming. Indeed in the ensuing pages we point to varied places that are embracing experience and education.

Why now, because we owe it to our children, our grand children and generations to come. Why now because as momentum builds for customization or experience based learning the normal trends to re-tool what we already have are powerful. We cannot let this happen. It is imperative that as momentum grows we stimulate a system imbued with trust, freedom and accountability unique to each setting. Should we fail in this the end result will mirror what we have and the children will lose.

To avoid this we encourage you to go back to the beginning, to Dewey in 1938 looking at his work through our eyes. And, in doing this we hope you are destined to design a learning environment driven by the needs of children and their experiences as opposed to the wants of present day society.

Tom Butler Altoona, Pa

Duff RearickRoanoke Va.

5

Table of Contents

Forward ………………………………………………………………………. 2

How to use this reflection …………………………………………….. 3

Prologue ………………………………………………………………………. 4-5

Chapter 1: Traditional verses Progressive Education ……… 7-11

Chapter 2: The need for a Theory of Education ………………. 12-16

Chapter 3: The Criteria of Experience ………………………….... 17-21

Chapter 4: Social Controls …………………………………………....... 22-27

Chapter 5: The Nature of Freedom ………………………………… 28-33

Chapter 6: The Meaning of Purpose ……………………………… 34-39

Chapter 7: The Progressive Organization of Subject Matter. 40-44

Chapter 8: Experience the Means and Goal of Education …... 45-49

Final Thoughts …………………………………………………………………. 50-52

6

Chapter 1

Dewey on Traditional verses Progressive Education

Or

‘Either / or -- verses the ‘and’

7

Reflected thinking from Chapter 1:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

You are cultivating the individual as opposed to the massLearning is based upon a defined outcome reached through experiences based upon past experienceYou must know the children - your learner very wellYou must embrace student and teacher agency built upon freedom to fail, trust and personalized accountability

General thoughts and foundation principles:A characteristic comparison:

Traditional Progressiveo Imposition from above Cultivation of the individualo External discipline Intrinsic disciplineo Learning from aged curricula Learning based upon

experienceo Isolated disconnected skill Integration of skill o Preparation for a remote future Finding opportunityo Static aim Recognition of a

transforming world

Our education system is built upon habit and urban legend. Develop new habits, debunk the legends and you transform the system. This being true we must be very careful that a new order does not result in a command and control system as we have at presentIt is through the ‘and’ that the system of education will truly transformAll experiences must grow from the learners past experience, generate the next experience leading to a systemic defined outcomeThe current education system is agnostic. Change thinking, change belief and you transform the systemThere is a necessary and intimate relationship between the learner’s individual experience and the learning.

Simply put:

8

Experienced based learning is all about the learner, regardless of age, starting with what he / she knows then building out a series of experiences that guide the learner to a desired outcome.

Tom:

Recently I completed reading What Hath God Wrought: The transformation of America from 1815-1848 by Daniel Walker Howe. I mention this because the author refers to this time in American History as a time of a “communication revolution”. Whether it was people marveling at the (short) 78 days it took a ship to travel from China to New York or the mind blowing speed at which the telegraph allowed communication to occur, people marveled at the improvement of the speed of communication. I mention this because I believe we have deluded ourselves in the 21st century to think that we live in a “special” time in which technological change is happening at a pace never equaled before in the history of mankind. That assumption is just not true. Each stage of history American history has undergone incredible changes that has significantly impacted our society. In other words, change is a constant and people living through it always believe the change they are experiencing is the most significant ever. However, nothing is static.

In chapter One of Experience and Education, Dewey criticizes the educational system because society views subject matter and instruction as a static entity which has no relevance to the lived experience of students.

“Moreover, that which is taught is thought of as essentially static. It is taught as a finished product, with little regard to the ways in which it was originally built up or to the changes that will surely occur in the future. It is to a large extent a cultural product of societies that assumed that the future would be much like the past, and yet it is used as educational food in a society where change is the rule and not the exception” [my italics] (p. 19).

Two interesting points. First, in 1938 when Dewey was writing this book he recognized that societies are in a constant state of change and, two, educators must not be fooled into thinking knowledge is static. If one believes that knowledge is static, then viewing the world through what Dewey calls an “either-or” dichotomy will help you make sense of the past but inhibits you in making sense of the present and future.

I believe educators must embrace the grey area between the “either-or’s”. Educational reformers (I like to call them deformers) have set the narrative of education to either-or. If you do not agree with what they want to do to education, then you are against kids because what they want to do is all that will work. This has resulted in an intensification

9

of the education philosophy that Dewey was speaking against: teach the standards from an approved textbook and make a curriculum that is imposed from outside the education system. My dream for true educational transformation (and I know Duff Rearick is rolling his eyes at my use of “transformation”) starts with educators (namely teachers) working in the area between the either-or’s. This means, like Dewey mentions in chapter One, that we understand what works and does not work in our current system and create learning experiences for students that allows the subject matter to come alive in the context of our current society.

We must create an atmosphere in schools (or whatever iteration of schools the future holds) where teachers are not imposing subject matter onto the students. Rather, the teacher will create experiences (working with the students) that will contextualize the learning the student is attempting to understand. The act of creating experiences versus imposing “knowledge” increases the importance of teachers in the educational system. They are not just portals in which established knowledge is passed through to students, they use their knowledge of the subject, the student, their community and society to craft learning experiences which are meaningful. In effect, the act of creating experiences professionalizes teachers.

Duff:

At this very moment a 6th grade teacher, Autumn Woodward, is into her day with the children. Autumn is a groundbreaking educator. Her energy and impatience are infectious as are her love for children and for literacy. She is at this point in time is building a case for tying experience to learning and education.

As we talk about customizing education, learners, learning facilitators and transforming the industrialized system; Autumn is doing it. Autumn is not, to say the least a patient person when it comes to the education system and children. Like John Dewey she does not believe that the idea of experience in education is an either / or phenomena, rather she embraces ‘the and.’

Six or so periods each day twenty-five or so children are learning through experiences designed specifically for him or her. Each child using technology is being asked to engage in reading experiences that are tailored to his or her need and interest. Every day each child reads, is assessed and monitors progress. Each day he or she is working independent of the child in the next seat. Each day Autumn’s classes are customized through her thinking, her courage, her passion and personalized through the technology. She is the game-changer!

The grand debate in education is focused on the system; perhaps, just perhaps the issue is our thinking within ‘the system’. If afforded an impetuous of innovation and freedom there is little reason why everyone cannot provide experiences as Dewey describes.

The Israelite King Solomon was near the end of his life in 970 BC. He wrote in Ecclesiastes 1:9 (The Holy Bible, New King James Version, Thomas Nelson 1988) that

10

there is nothing new under the sun. In 1938 John Dewey (Experience and Education, Simon & Shuster) wrote of the conflict between progressive and traditional educational philosophies. There literally has been nothing new under the sun.

Dewey in Experience and Education, Chapter 1, questions the wisdom of our progressive verses traditional debates, our either / or camps. Obtusely he suggests that we might do better focusing first on the experience a child has verses the system in which those experiences occur. The child is more important than the system. Every good teacher knows this, it is practice that is difficult.

Dewey questions the traditional system. He challenges the forced role of teachers as a source of information and authority. He challenges a staid curriculum determined by history. He promotes the teacher as a facilitator, a guide who fosters thinking. He emphasizes the standard that learning occurs through inspired experience built upon the child’s former experience. He emphasizes that experiences good or bad lead to learning that leads to additional experiences.

Interestingly, Dewey in Democracy and Education (Simon & Shuster 1916) built a case for a literate thinking populace. He articulated that without literacy, without thinking, without learning, without a standard of education democracy would be doomed. In 1917, he argued that education for all its faults was the guarantor of this need.

The questions raised are many; is our 21st century journey into customizing or personalizing new under the sun? Is a journey to customizing and personalizing dependent upon the system?

Autumn, right now, in a 6th grade middle school reading class through her teaching is answering - no. She might suggest that when a teacher is encouraged to think, to expand, to innovate, to explore the possibilities for a child’s learning the opportunities are endless. Perhaps our issue is leadership.

Maybe our grand debate should be about thinking, after all that is Dewey’s base premise in all he writes. With hard and dangerous, disruptive thinking we just might create something new under the sun. Autumn certainly has!

11

Chapter 2

Dewey on The Need of a Theory of Experience

Or

Know the Child - build from there

12

Reflected thinking from Chapter 2:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

Education as we know it today is void of theory or philosophy of learning. It is over ridden with science and data. This leads to a dearth of thinking there in retarding the art of learning. This according to Dewey must transform to a child centric experience based on reality as opposed to a once and done learning opportunity.

General thoughts and foundation principles:A part of the theory of experience is the willingness to embrace failure understanding that when guided miss experience is as valuable as positive experienceAll experience leads to learning in some form. The two learning and experience cannot be disconnected. They must be symbiotic each going to a desired outcomeA theory of guided experience always leads one down a path toward the desired outcomeAt present educators in general have little to no defined theory of learning; they are institutionalized there in being part of the problem and of the solutionDewey’s theory is a cataclysmic shift from curriculum as it is defined in a modern system.

Simply put:This journey begins and ends with inspired adults. Dewey’s theory is not science nor data driven, as we know it. Each is important but decisions are left to the teacher and learner. It is the teacher’s responsibility to use science / data and other tools, to work in concert with the child, to guide him or her and in an effort to design learning experiences that best serve need.

13

Duff:

On April 20, 1999 two young men in Littleton Colorado, students at Columbine High School committed an act of terror. Their experiences lead to brutality that haunts education to this day. An era of fear had begun.

In the fall of 1999 a young man, because of his miss-experiences (Dewey, Experience and Education, 1938) came to believe that he was invisible, that no one cared at home or at school. These experiences lead to learning, a learning of anger.

The young man was in seventh grade in a very good caring middle school. He decided to act upon what he knew by writing a note describing how he was going to “… blow up the school”. His motivation was to kill select teachers that he believed had wronged him. The note was intercepted and schools were closed. The era of fear had come to our community.

Obviously and unfortunately bombs are not selective. But who can be certain the mind of a normal seventh grade boy, let alone a child filled with anger. Fortunately we discovered the child’s identity before any harm occurred beyond disruption. I was superintendent of the school district.

The young man was on a team of four excellent teachers. In meeting with them to seek information about the child I found that we knew very little about him. This young man, like the young men in Colorado had become invisible - to us.

Through time and hard work we found far too many invisible children. In not knowing their experiences in and beyond school we were not active partners in what Dewey would call the learning experience. Suddenly curriculum was not all that important - our focus turned to the children.

As we refined this humbling discovery we made a decision, a commitment. We would do everything possible to know every child, to know every child’s family, their hopes and their dreams from birth to graduation. And, in knowing we would do everything within our power to create positive learning experiences for each child. This non-negotiable decision impacted everything from our staffing, to our professional learning, to our curriculum, to our budget.

We did not set out to change the system. As Dewey writes a simple departure from the old solves nothing. We could have worked to create a new progressive system. We did not; rather we chose to transform our thinking about children.

14

Unfortunately experience suggests that Dewey is right. In time this new system would look like the old. We would be doing business as usual. If education systems have proven anything it is resilience and resistance. It is our habit to default to what we know.

Rather than change the system we set out to transform learning experiences first, of our adults and then the children. This lead to increased learning and more experiences. In time the system began to shift - in time.

Dewey notes that in traditional classrooms children have experiences that lead to a cycle of learning through experience, transitioning to a new cycle of experiences and learning. The key is the experience, not the system.

The seminal question is who guides the experience? We found the tipping point is an inspired teacher with a wealth of knowledge about the child, the family and their experiences. Just such a teacher is, Tiffany Bartello (Rockhill Elementary Southern Huntingdon School District, Orbisonia Pa).

Tiffany and I were discussing experiences and role of technology in elementary classrooms. She wrote in her normal direct manner “I am the teacher that is my job.” It was and is her passion to know each child and through that lens to guide experiences.

Tiffany, as Dewey challenges, has a Theory of Experience. It begins and ends with her inspired and engaged commitment to knowing each child, their family, their hopes and their dreams.

But make no mistake; a commitment to know each child and to tailor experiences is just the first step on a difficult journey. The solutions may be simple and straightforward; it is the journey, of hard choices and painful breaks from tradition that require persistence and patience. A choice as Tiffany is making requires courage and risk

Looking back to 1999, we found our bomb note writer. He was troubled because of experiences at home and with us. He was disciplined but not in our traditional fashion. We decided that we were part of the problem and did not shuffle him to our alternative behavior program, rather our staff committed to his success. They, the teachers and principals designed specific experiences for him. Because of rash act, a cry for help, we had our first blended virtual learning experience. In time, he returned to a transformed traditional program, graduated and went on with his life.

The young man became the first of many personalized learning programs, each fitting into an increasingly customized learning environment. The idea was simple but first we had to struggle through the hard.

Tom:

In our MCL circles we discuss creating the “ideal learning experience”. The idea of the ideal learning experience is a reaction to our current learning environment that is dominated by “not so ideal learning experiences”. We can list all of the learning experiences that are not ideal, but they can be summed up by the dominance of the “sage on the stage”. Harkening back to chapter 1, we must also remember that we must not

15

succumb to the “either-or” fallacy. We must resist the urge to think that our job will be done in education if we create “experiences” that differ from the existing model of learning. Dewey makes this point by saying that although “Each experience may be lively, vivid and ‘interesting’, and yet their disconnectedness may artificially generate dispersive, disintegrated, centrifugal habits” that will make education and experiences more disconnected from a student’s life. Our challenge in the world of MCL is to NOT fall into the trap of thinking that creating any experience will automatically improve learning for students just because it is a different experience from what currently exists in our schools.

Dewey states that experiences are meaningful only when they are connected to a student’s future experience. This is the reason that disconnected learning experiences (according to Dewey) harm the learning of students; they have no relevance to the experience (either in the present or the future) of students. It seems to me that if we are going to have a significant impact on the arc of learning in our country, we must grapple with this idea of creating learning experiences that are relevant to the present and connected to future learning experiences of students. We must be cognizant that a learning experience that is engaging and outside the common learning experience of today may not necessarily be any better than a traditional learning experience. Let’s not kid ourselves to believe that just because we are creating something different, that we are creating something better.

So what is our philosophy of education? I think it noteworthy that Dewey takes the time to say that our current system is probably philosophically agnostic and runs on the power of habits. The habits of the system have largely gone unexamined and have morphed into a quasi philosophy. I recently had a conversation with a well known educator who shows passion for helping kids. As we discussed what the possibilities of education can be, he continually referred to practices that are backed by “science”. In other words, educators need only refer to those strategies and programs that have run the gauntlet of peer reviewed “scientific” research. There are many problems with the assumptions underlying this philosophy of scientific research, but for our discussion here, let’s concentrate on the idea that we must keep education, learning and schooling as simple as possible. When my son was in first grade (and struggling with reading), I did not ask his teacher to mount a mini-dissertation defense to develop and justify her recommendation for helping him. Rather, I simply asked her what she believes, in her professional experience, will help him become a better reader. She developed a plan (that worked) based on what she knew to be right. As we develop a philosophy of learning (and experience) let’s access the experiences and knowledge of the actual educators in the field and lets not complicate the issue by assuming educational habits are a philosophy and that “scientific” research holds the answer to creating learning experiences.

16

Dewey Chapter 3

The Criteria of Experience

Or

Does What We are Asking People to Learn Really make Sense?

17

Reflected thinking from Chapter 3:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

There is no doubt that the education system we know so well and often find security in must transform to meet the learning needs of a post modern culture. Forcing this shift is destined to fail. What must be considered are the habits of the system starting with what we are asking children to think about, to learn and how we relate that to a continuity of experience that makes sense to all involved

General thoughts and foundation principles:Decisions about learning, in our current system focus on control as opposed to learning as defined by Dewey. That is according to Dewey a habit that must change. Traditional and progressive education philosophies focus on performance. The difference is how the performance is defined, how the learning occurs.Learning is a habit engendered by thinking about and performing within experience. These experiences align the past present and future in a manner that makes sense targeted on a desired outcome. Each new experience builds upon the past, something learned whether positive or negative. The focus then is on the desired end in a flow of inter-related experiences as opposed to our current focus on disaggregated compartmentalized information delivered in hope that it all makes sense in time. The role of the teacher is to guide, encourage and design a continuum of experiences that have continuity and meaning, that make sense. This begins with the teacher knowing each child as an individual. The system to accommodate this reality must address at a minimum issues of time, of delivery, of professional learning and of accountability

Simply put:You can neither legislate an experience-based ethos nor can you change habits by force. People must in time evolve their thinking to imbue an experience-based philosophy. There is no short cut.

18

Tom:

As we construct the new learning ecosystem (based on principles of Mass Customized Learning), the role of experience becomes a concept that we must address. The new learning ecosystem (with the learner at the center) is really an “experience generator” for students. The challenge is to assure that the experiences that are built have what Dewey calls “continuity”. Continuity is simply the recognition that one experience builds toward another experience and that we cannot construct educational experiences that exists in “water tight” (Dewey’s term) compartments that are unrelated to each other. The goal of multiple experiences is growth for the student. The role of the teacher is to encourage experiences (and create experiences) for students that encourage growth in all areas of their development. The new learning ecosystem will avoid the narrow definition of growth that is now dominating education; namely growth equated to better scores on standardized tests. Growth will be equated with how experiences will lead to further growth for students in all areas of development.

Learning facilitators will be charged with creating learning experiences that encourage growth and this will be a change in role for them. Learning facilitators will create experiences that recognize the physical and social importance of a learning experience (Dewey calls these objective factors). Our history (and training) in education has been to concentrate on a very narrow sliver of the physical aspects of creating a learning experience. Things like textbooks and classroom layout have dominated our thinking while social aspects have been largely ignored (especially how they relate to creating a continuity of learning experiences).

My last reaction to this chapter as it relates to what we are building within the MCL framework is that our traditional education system creates (or demands) learning experiences that are unrelated to each other. We may tell students that they have to learn something (or take a class and “learn”) because “it is good for you” or that it will teach you “discipline” or that you will “use it later in life”. This is intellectual dishonesty toward our learners and toward ourselves. Without anchoring the learning experience in the life of the student, the learning experience becomes an abstract concept with little or no meaning for the learner. Our new learning ecosystem will not have a learning experiences whose stated objective for learning is that “it is good for you”.

Duff:

19

“Is this decision, this activity about learning or control?”

In the dark ages, in 1983 a young school administrator was hand picked by a school district to cross the nation in search of the key to critical thinking. How to teach children to think critically was at the time all the rage. Needless to say this was a heady time for a 33-year old assistant principal.

You might think his selection stemmed from remarkable intellectual prowess. You would be wrong. He was chosen because no one else wanted the job.

The young man flew about thinking he was important. His journey took him from Los Angeles, to Dallas and other exotic sites finally ending in Washington DC. He sought the Holy Grail of learning in 1983, critical thinking. The answers proved elusive.

By the time he arrived in Washington DC exhaustion had set in, his wife was tired of keeping the home fire burning and frankly he had stopped thinking. At his last stop the young man sat in the back row of another hotel conference center. He found himself beside a crusty old educator. As the speaker waxed eloquently about some book or other he or she had written on critical thinking the old gentleman leaned over and whispered words that guided the rest of the young man’s career.

“It is not the system or that kids cannot think, that is ridiculous. All kids can think critically, the problem is what we are asking them to think about.”

After dropping this pearl of wisdom the old codger left never to be seen again. His message stuck, ‘What are we asking people to think about?’

Fast forward to 2009. The young man is now 59 years old and still searching for the Holy Grail. Six fourth grade children, each 9 or so years old, are selected for a unique Odyssey of the Mind experience. Some are bored others typical kids. A few we might label as gifted others not so much, each comes with different backgrounds and experiences. The education for these few children shifts from control to learning. They are asked to build upon past experiences.

The children are challenged. As a team they are assigned a project. It is a difficult task one that builds upon past experiences hopefully leading to new learning.

The young leaners are asked to build a hovercraft. A parent volunteers to supervise but is restricted to safety, to insure no fingers are lost. The children are given direction; they cannot spend more than $100. They must complete their project within a few weeks. Outcome accountability is clear and simple, the craft must fly; it must fly with one child securely seated on it; the craft must turn in four directions and it must show emotion while flying. In a few weeks this typical group combines their experience, builds upon past experience and completes the task. The team demonstrates the outcome in front of peers and parents. They meet all the criteria --- it flies!

I have found a new old codger - me. Watching this experiment, I was reminded that the problem is not with the children, it is not with the system, rather it is about risk and what we are asking teachers and children to think about leading back to John Dewey, Experience and Education, Chapter 3: Criteria of Experience and a series ideas we might consider.

First, learning is a habit, school systems are built on habits indeed we live by habits. You cannot change or transform habits by force. We are too resilient. To

20

transform a habit we must alter the experience, thinking in such as a way as to cause the learner to choose to change. This requires logical experiences building upon experiences and a lot of time. To be plausible the experience must have direction, a destination.

Dewey believes in experiences building on experience. He does not believe in random outcomes.

In his writing Dewey’s criteria of experience are guided by educators, teachers. The experiences only make sense if there is an end goal a destination. This said Dewey might suggest that we need to consider what the learners are thinking about, the experience as it relates to where the learning is taking the person.

Unfortunately as proven by our six nine year olds we underestimate the capacity of adults and children to think, to build experience upon experience. If you look at our team they are given a defined destination, asked to blend their individual talents and experiences and a learning facilitator who just happened to be a parent.

The old codger’s comment and the nine-year-old experience are guides to the criteria of experience. It all comes down to what we are asking adults and children to experience, to think about in a framework of increasing freedom, trust and choice.

But, this thinking is hard work at every level. Henry Ford is purported to have said, “Thinking is hard work that is why so few people do it.” When you move down the path to which Dewey alludes; you must think with the end in mind, from that you find the criteria of experience.

In spite of the missed seat time, absence from critical instruction all of our nine children did well on their state exams. I guess they did not miss too much when asked to think about something different.

21

Chapter 4

Social Control

Or

Who is - Who Should Be Driving the Bus

22

Reflected thinking from Chapter 4:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

A basic decision must be made as to the individual and corporate courage to shift the locus of social control from a command structure to a de-centralized form of learning and accountability.

General thoughts and foundation principlesAssume that the two greatest assets in education are the learner and the teacher.Teachers are in charge. They can change course, design experience and guide based upon their best skill set. To achieve experience we must overcome institutionalized control as in our ready compliance to be told what to do and how to do it. In achieving this the current social control evaporates in timeThe innovation / leadership pyramid flips placing the learner at the apex followed by the teacher. There is control but control through accountability not process. Move social control away from reliance on test metric, data driven one size fits all decision making. In doing so shift the learning journey to customized experiences moving the learner toward a pre-defined end outcomeAll control mechanism’s from time, to classroom structure, to classroom existence, to certification, to staffing must be re-thought as one moves toward a new form of social control. Do not assume this is an either / or ideal or that it is going to be easy or that it does not require great courage.

Simply puts:The challenge presented by Dewey is in influencing, in transforming the status quo as questions are dialoged and answered such as: Who is in charge; what is the child’s / learners role; what is the teachers role; what is the role of curriculum; how do you insure accountability; how much control is necessary; how do you build freedom and trust in a culture that has known only command and control; what is the end goal, the end outcome and how do you measure it?

23

Tom:

The title of this chapter is a little intimidating: Social Control. Wow! At first blush one may worry that Dewey is going to delve into the intricacies of schools as they relate to societal control. Fortunately, this is not what Dewey discusses in this chapter. This chapter places the educator (learning facilitator, teacher, etc..) at the forefront of education and says, “Go ahead, you are in charge, you change the course of learning”…or at least that is what I took away from the chapter!

Educators must expand their beliefs about their role in educating children. In the dominant, top-down bureaucratic world many educators believe that their planning for their work (whether it is the classroom teacher making their lesson plans, or the school administrator leading the organization) is foundationally based on two rules. These are the two rules in a “Command and Control” educational world. The first rule is control. Keep the classroom (or school) in “order” and keep the kids under control. The second rule is (at all costs) present the information to the students that will be on the State mandated tests…period. The way in which this information is presented to the students can, theoretically, be in various forms from lecturing to engagement of the students. Unfortunately, because of the first rule of “order”, a command and control view of curriculum and instruction dominates the education landscape and engagement is not the norm. The responsibility to change these two rules of planning fall squarely on educators.

In my career I have conducted hundreds of meetings/workshops with teachers and administrators. In the vast majority of these meetings I have experienced educators who are turning themselves inside out for their students and their schools. The dedication and passion that I have seen is inspiring both personally and professionally. I try to engage educators in the “why” of their practice. Why are they in education? Why is education important for their community and society? These questions are important and we spend a lot of time talking about them. I have discovered that educators are not conditioned to engage in conversations that ask these types of questions. Rather, they are so used to being told what to do and when to do it that it takes work on my part to fight through the indoctrination of the “Command and Control” ethos that our educators have been exposed to in their careers. The educators work in an environment where social control is reflected in the norms of their professional life: teach your kids this way; lead your school that way; wait for the State to tell you what, how and when to teach. This is the social control of the system and it is something that Dewey believes can be changed:

“The educator is responsible for a knowledge of individuals and for a knowledge of subject-matter that will enable activities to be selected which

24

lend themselves to social organization, an organization in which all individuals have an opportunity to contribute something, and in which the activities in which all participate are the chief carrier of control.” (56)

Learning for our children is in a state of flux. The options for students to engage in meaningful curricula and innovative instruction is a result of the technological revolution that we are experiencing. As true as that statement is, if educators are not empowered or if they do not have the courage to recognize their complicity in accepting the social control of the system, then our education system will not reach its potential. Educators can create learning experiences that transcend the social control of the system. By doing so, educators will create the conditions of freedom in their schools and classrooms…but it will require a different mindset. Educators will have to “see” that there are conditions within the system in which they operate that indoctrinate control. By placing the student and the learning experience at the center of everything that we do in education then the rules of “Command and Control” will dissipate. If educators choose to take responsibility for changing this dynamic (and I believe most will) they can plan differently and introduce freedom into their schools and create outstanding learning experiences.

Duff:

A football field is 120 yards long and 53.33 yards wide. The white lines on the perimeter control the game, you cannot play outside the lines. The lines insure a fair and reasonable outcome. You see football, like education is a game of rules. Football, like education is a game of organized chaos played within the boundaries, within the rules. The question Dewey addresses is not a need to dismantle rather it is a question of who is in control. It is a question of how much freedom to innovate, to create should exist within the white lines.

In football you have players (the learners), those pesky people who succeed or fail. Players have little control over the game until the whistle blows. Teachers, coaches (learning facilitators) are juxtaposed in their role. The coaches have great influence until the whistle blows. One question is; ‘Once the door to the classroom closes and the learning begins who is or should be in control of the experience’. Should there even be a classroom? How would we play the game without boundaries insuring success for every child?

On a football team offensive lineman are often the most intelligent, most creative and most deviant players on the field. They are our children, our learners.

Each week after the chaos ends a lineman is judged, rated based upon how he performed on every play. His performance is measured; it is closely monitored. The more successful he is the less control. He is given freedom to innovate in his upcoming experience, the next game. The weaker the learner's performance the more restraint he is under. Experience builds upon experience as the lineman grows and performs. But, there is social control.

25

The coach is the gatekeeper of control, the teacher (the learning facilitator). The coach grades performance and decides upon the next experience. It is his job to know his players. He must know their personal needs, skill level, confidence, intelligence and motivation. Thus data, a system of social control is critical to the coach putting the player in a position for success.

A coach designs tasks, blocking assignments and suggests experiences that might lead to success in the next game. But, when the whistle blows he is not on the field. He guides but has little to no control.

Success or failure, when the game begins is based solely upon preparation, the coach’ and player’ ability to link a continuity of experiences designed to hopefully guarantee success. You cannot have a slow person blocking a fast person or a midget blocking a 300-pound defensive tackle. Somehow adjustments, planning and preparation must be aligned to insure a positive outcome before the whistle blows.

Linemen prepare, coaches coach and when the whistle blows the game is played in a box. There is an anticipated outcome. Habit, history, integrity and a referee influence the game. There are rules that must be followed. Progress must be measured and a score is kept. Penalties are assessed. All of this is designed to insure a reasonable end - to control the experience. The referee’s job is to manage the chaos, to influence a fair outcome but not to dictate it.

In the end, the team that can link successful experience with successful experience wins. Yet it must be realized that win or lose both teams learn, the players (leaners) learn, the coaches (learning facilitators / teachers) learn and referees (administrators) learn from the experience - good and bad. The challenge, the gift is to build upon the learning.

What does this football metaphor have to do with Dewey, Chapter 4 Social Control? Dewey boils the question down to command and control.

Who or what is in charge of the system? What does accountability look like? What is the child’s (learners) role? What is the government’s role? What is the curriculum’s role? What is the teacher’s role? How much social control does a learning facilitator (teacher / coach) need in

framing experiences? How much trust, freedom does the learning facilitator have? What is the end goal, how do you rate success and failure?

The questions go on and on. But, for the customizers, the freedom seekers, the progressives even Dewey believed there must be some form of social control, some system. And for the traditionalists it is clear that the system we have does not

26

suit Dewey’s idea of Experience and Education. The current state of affairs stifles learning; it does not build upon opportunity. It is a system of command and control in the wrong place.

How do you meld the two, progressive and traditional, striving to get past the either / or, to change thinking and in so doing develop the - and. There in lies the challenge.

27

Chapter 5

The Nature of Freedom

Or

Messing With the Magic

28

Reflected thinking from Chapter 5:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

Experience based learning requires a transformation. It requires messing with the magic of current educational thought and systems. It is inclusive of redesign of the most basic pillars or what we have been taught, what we have experienced and what we know.

General thoughts and foundation principlesCurrently we regiment children, dis-aggregate information and in time grow learners that do not like thinking, as we require. Yet all can think.In an effort to control we have lost the freedom necessary for intellectual curiosity. Assuming the validity of this thought we must look at the concept and design of school and classrooms. In a sense bigger is not necessarily better in an information post-modern age.Dewey’s idea of messing with the magic, the status quo:

o Freedom is a non-negotiable necessary for observation, for thinking and for learning

o Worthwhile learning (experience) trumps content - alwayso Regimented culture, time structured, control oriented cultures are not

the natural state for learningo All learning experiences must have an end objective and outcome.

This reality negates the magic of curriculum as we define ito Freedom and learner maturity (not age) parallel o Freedom is a product on knowing the child and from that form

connecting the dots of learning to the desired outcomeHire only teachers and leaders who can think, then provide them the platform to explore and riskFreedom / learning has two inter-related parts the physical and the intellectual. Deprive either and learning atrophiesAll experienced based learning or customization must by its very nature eliminate winners, losers and in time - time

Simply puts:Experience based education, customizing is practical today. One only need look to the structures of time, teacher assignment, professional learning, school design and so on. The difficulty is in courage and a discipline to look at learning through a lens that is foreign to those explorers willing to try.

29

Duff:

They can take everything from you except the right to chooseVictor FranklParaphrased

Man’s Search for Meaning

I am blessed to have five grandchildren ranging in age from four to thirteen. Each is uniquely different. Each including the four year old attends school. Each of the five is being molded by their respective school cultures.

The schools are regimented. Yet, these children grow in enriched home environments. They are literate by any standard and are being taught, at home, freedom of thought and intellectual curiosity. Unfortunately, as children they are in an increasing minority. To different degrees there are signs that at least two are learning to dislike learning.

One of the five attends a public school; let us call it Freedom Middle School. Children far less enriched than this grandchild make up the majority of the population in Freedom Middle School. Indeed what is missing for the majority of the children is structure, what could be characterized as the discipline of learning. To maintain control the school is highly regimented. Freedom of thought is overwhelmed by order for without order there is chaos. Safety is paramount for chaos is dangerous. Yet, all of us, according to Dewey learn best when we are permitted intellectual curiosity, a product of freedom.

When you caste Dewey’s words into the culture of Freedom Middle School the conundrum is apparent. Dewey, in Chapter 5: The Nature of Freedom builds his case for freedom using several critical points that lead to questions we should attempt to answer for Freedom Middle.

Freedom is necessary for thinking, for observation.o Question: How do you maintain enough control without infringing on freedom?o Question: Is freedom a right, can it be lost or earned or perhaps redesigned?

Worthwhile learning is more important than content.o Question: What is more important for children of all stature entering the 22nd

century - learning skill or content skill, how do you blend the two? The fixed arrangements of school, its military order are not a natural state for ideal learning

experiences.o Question: What does a framework for ideal learning experiences for adults and

children look like? Ideal learning experiences, freedom are great but Dewey repeatedly insists that all

experiences must have a destination, an end objective an outcome.o Question: Is freedom, its nature open ended or is it guided with the end in mind?o Question: If guided what is the school’s learning end point, the measure of success?

Freedom itself must be customized, it must follow the maturity of the learnero Question: What do learning facilitators and teachers believe about freedom within

the context they work?

30

o Question: How do you influence beliefs about learning freedom?o Question: How do you deal with safety, are schools too large, why buildings anyway?

Freedom is a product of knowing the child, which is a product of data and time.o How do you change time and data to benefit the learner, the parents and the teacher

/ learning facilitator

Perhaps there is a solution for Freedom Middle. Perhaps the solution begins with time. The re-framing of time is neither complex nor costly. The journey begins long before the

child arrives on Freedom Middle’s doors step. The solution is possible anywhere, in any setting. As in all transformations the answer requires will, desire and commitment; there in is the mountain we must climb.

We start our story on time at the beginning. This minute somewhere in Freedom Middle’s attendance zone Pat a six-pound bundle of joy is born. His mother is single and poor. His mother and father are poor. His mother is single and wealthy. The economic scenarios and parent status are irrelevant. Regardless of circumstance this is a time of joy, hope and fear. Inevitably all parents ask the age-old question; “What do we do now?” A teachable moment is before us.

Most of us parent as we were parented. Good bad or indifferent we revert to what we know. We leave Pat’s parents to generational parenting habits good and bad. We do this knowing full well that Pat’s parents are responsible, as they should be for guiding their bundle of joy through a series of ideal (perhaps) learning experiences for the next 5 years. These parents are responsible for well over one half of what Pat will ever know.

Pat’s mother, these young parents are responsible for his literacy, his learning future. During these critical pre school years, before Pat ever steps foot in a school he learns language, how to learn and values. His foundation is set and if cracks exist they are very hard to fill later in the journey.

This cultural child rearing habit leaves all of this critical building to busy, working, tired young parents. The hue and cry goes out, we need more school, pre-school, formal education, and more regimentation. But, perhaps that is easy and expensive rather than necessary and best.

For the sake of clarity we call our new idea the Freedom Model. It begins before Pat is enrolled in school. But I digress we must go back to the beginning.

Shortly after the blessed day a district representative arrives bearing gifts for Pat and his parent. Our first learning facilitator is on the scene.

The gifts may be books, ideas for early reading; perhaps an I pad tablet with applications downloaded; whatever the gifts the message is clear we care about you and your child. Included are hints on parenting, a web site, a help line and some simple do’s and do not’s for raising a new born. A connection is made, Pat’s parents are engaged and customizing is under way.

As we follow our Freedom Model on each birthday Pat’s parents and Pat are visited at home. Along with encouragement questions are answered and new gifts arrive. Perhaps new applications are downloaded. The journey continues.

In time the setting shifts. Pat’s parents are invited to the school. Ideas are shared, gifts are given, parenting hints continue, a relationship is built. Pat’s parents become part of the learning solution rather than a part of the problem.

Time being short we simplify our story even by racing forward in time - Pat is now five. At this ripe old age Pat is a sponge of learning. The summer before he enters kindergarten Pat visits the school and is tested for basic literacy, math fluency and learning style. He is assigned to a teacher / learning facilitator. Teaching style is congruent to his learning style. The second learning facilitator is entering Pat’s life. They begin a three-year journey together. Pat and his teacher / facilitator are destined to know each other very well, they have time on their side.

31

The facilitator / teacher and Pat’s parents design a three-year ideal learning experience for him. The end goal, the benchmark, the three-year outcome is simple: literacy and math fluency at grade level by the end of grade 2. The flow of information between the home and school is seamless. Each birthday a parent visit is encouraged perhaps required. If Pat’s parents cannot or will not come the school goes to them. For the educators not communicating is a not an option. This time is all too critical. Gifts are given, hints are shared, applications are downloaded and the journey continues.

By grade three the process, the system repeats. Pat is tested. His learning style is re-defined. A third learning facilitator / teacher is assigned with every consideration given to teaching style and longevity. Information is passed; progress monitoring is taught; plans are made, there is no guesswork.

Once again this segment of Pat’s journey to Freedom Middle lasts three years. Time for birthday visits is set aside. The system flows on.

At the end of grade six the learning platform once again shifts, a customized plan is designed tailored to a predicted quotient for freedom, learning style and, of course Pat and his parents dream for the future. The process continues with expanded or contracted freedom; customized experiences are designed to accommodate Pat rather than the system.

In time the Freedom Model transforms school from a system centric to a child, Pat centric culture. In time, you shift time.

The why, the reason is simple. Pat’s parents spend somewhere in the neighborhood of 1,100,000 waking minutes with him, teaching him. In most cases there is little to no formal education contact during this time.

In contrast the average teacher, in our current elementary system spends 70,200 minutes with Pat. A teacher in the secondary system is with him and 119 or so other children at the best 10,800 minutes. The problem is how we use our time!

In our new customized system the school engages early and influences the critical 1,100,000. It expands, in elementary (K-6) teacher / child contact time to 210,600 minutes. The child and parents shift from a 10-teacher model to a three teacher design by the end of sixth grade. Time shifts remarkably as does accountability, as does the targeted expanse of Dewey’s freedom.

All of this may seem difficult but is it really? Indeed when studied the learning expands, student progress expands and costs decrease.

What is written here, in principle has occurred in the 20th century there is no reason not to shift, to transform with the tools at hand in the 21st. Of course, transformation always depends on the will of our leaders, parents and teachers to envision a new normal.

Educators in spite of all that swirls around them have the right to choose how time is defined. The question is, do they as Victor Frankl did have the courage? Do we have the courage to choose to provide every child, every life with the best opportunity possible?

Tom:

 For my reaction to this chapter I am going to explicitly discuss Mass Customized Learning and reflect on an essay by Jordan Shapiro that was recently published in Forbes magazine (http://www.forbes.com/sites/jordanshapiro/2016/01/30/weve-had-100-years-of-progressive-education-and-the-worlds-getting-worse/ - 54bb93945cb7) as well as John Dewey. In chapter 5, Dewey discusses two kinds of freedom: physical freedom and intellectual freedom.  Dewey strives for a school system where students have significantly more physical freedom from which he believes intellectual freedom emerges.  For example, students silently sitting in rows awaiting the word from the all knowing teacher hinders the

32

process intellectual freedom of students because the structure of compliance impedes intellectual freedom . In other words, the learning process must have as its basis a level of physical freedom.

Meanwhile, Shapiro argues for a new “normalization” in school structures. Specifically, he states, “What we need instead is a new kind of normalization—new classroom rules, new district wide administrative systems, new school designs and new educational customs that will break the cycle of winners and losers, haves and have nots, believers and heathens.”  At the heart of Shapiro’s criticism of the current education system is that it glorifies (one may argue sanctifies) the fact that there are winners and losers in society.  Schools “normalize” students into the belief that efficiency and productivity are equated with high morality and those that accumulate more have more value. These are the “normalized” (almost hidden) structures of schools.  In effect, the structures become more important to individuals and society than the skills that are being taught to our children.

How does an MCL structure differ from the current structure of schooling? Does it allow for physical freedom of the students?  Yes. Does it allow for the intellectual freedom of students? Maybe. Does it fundamentally change the “normalized” structures of learning? I think we really have to reflect on this question. 

If it is worthwhile to create a system where the common good is as important as climbing your personal Mount Everest, then we must grapple with what MCL actually changes.  The benefit of an MCL structure is that, foundationally, it is not about tinkering on the edges of learning.  Rather, it is about changing structures of learning.  The problem, as I see it, is that all of us involved in the designing of the MCL experience are subconsciously enmeshed in the current system.  Our professional default mode is away from freedom (both physically and intellectually) and toward traditional, normalized structures.  I see this as we are creating our new learning ecosystem at IU8. We have spent the better part of a year grappling with how to change the structure of learning. We have spent a lot of time discussing the importance (or lack thereof) of curriculum.  Should we concentrate on “21st Century skills”, or are these skills just window dressing to what is really important in schools?  In my mind, I am not interested in curriculum because I believe that any skill transfer to students is only tangential to the actual power of creating a meaningful learning experience.  In these learning experiences we can change the normalized structures of schooling and move away from the hyper individualized culture of the current school system.  Ultimately, I believe we can, and will, create a system that changes the structure of school.  However, it will take diligence on our part not to slip back into our default mode of education.

33

Chapter 6

The Meaning of Purpose

Or

Why?

34

Reflected thinking from Chapter 6:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

There is no doubt that you must work through understanding the why of your learning system before you begin a transformative journey. With sound planning undergirded with persistence, patience and flexibility you can and will transform learning if the purpose, the why is clear and non-negotiable.

General thoughts and foundation principlesThere can be no long lasting transformation without clarity of the why, the purpose of learning.Transformation begins with an idea a feeling that something is wrong and that you can do better. This idea filters through the context of where you are and becomes a passion. This leads you to your purpose. Purpose is conditioned by:

o Observation: where does the idea reside, come fromo Knowledge: a framework of what has happened in the pasto Judgment: the ability and willingness to reflect on that which is

important in the first two leading to a future outcomeSchools today are defined by structure and order, they are defined by adults telling children, they are defined by re-telling what has been told which is deemed to be important. Schools are agnostic, static and not equipped to grow a post-modern culture. Schools should be places of thinking where freedom of thought and exploration are focused on an outcome that serves the child and in turn grows that cultureThere must be a fundamental shift in the design of school that leads to re-framed thought on how learning occurs

Simply puts:Start with why, what is you want learning / education to do within your context, plan off of that reality and be patient, persistent and flexible

35

Tom:

Thus chapter discusses the purpose of education. Dewey expands on the theme of experience and says there are three aspects to keep in mind when we talk about the purpose of education: observation, knowledge and judgment. Observe the conditions from which a learning experience “resides”; knowledge of what has happened in similar circumstances in the past; and judgment that is used to help the person signify what is important from the first two which will lead to a future outcome. This is the “book report” part of this essay. What becomes interesting is when Dewey talks about the significance of what we observe about schooling/education. This is no small thing.

In an effort to untangle the significance of education and schooling, let’s try to look at schooling as if this is the first time we have seen it. What would we “see” if we were from our sister planet in a far away galaxy? We would notice that we place our young people in buildings that resemble another cultural icon of our times…prisons. Once we open the doors and walk inside these buildings (assuming we have the proper identification to get in) we would notice that we further break the students into smaller groups and place them in smaller compartments, called classrooms. Once we step inside the classroom we notice how orderly the room is including rows of desks. There is an adult in front of the class telling students information. In some classrooms we see students in groups working together under the supervision of the adult in the class. When asked what is happening in the classroom, the adult tells our interloper that the students are learning and that they will be tested on what they learn at a future date. When asked why this information that is presented to them is important, the adult in the room will say that the students will use it later in life. After the classroom visit, our intergalactic traveler visits what they are told is the “boss” of the school. Once inside the principal’s office he asks the principal where do the kids live? The principal explains to our friend that schools are based on where you live and that each community has their own school. It is further explained that kids must attend the schools that serve their community. When asked what is taught in the school, the principal explains that a group of people from outside the community determines what is important, and therefore, what must be taught.

I am going to stop at this point and discuss the implications of what we have learned so far.

So what, at the basest level, is the purpose of education/schooling? As I try to dig deep into this question I arrive at one point. Schooling is for the benefit of society. The benefit does not come from the content of what is taught/presented in the school. Rather, what is important is the structure of schooling and what the structure says about society. (For example, waiting in line for classes, placing our youth in buildings resembling prisons, sitting in rows waiting expectantly to be enlightened, and being subservient to authority.) This is what society wants from school. This is the true purpose of schooling/education. Of course John Dewey argued extensively against this type of school structure, as do many people today. All of the “controversy” surrounding curriculum or teaching methods takes a back seat to indoctrinating students to be subservient to authority. I am not going to argue whether this is good or bad in this blog post, I am just claiming that this is what society gains from “schooling” over the past 130 years.

The bigger question that was implied is what will the structure of education (or schooling) look like in the future?  One could argue that the structure of schooling will not change.  However, I believe that we are in the midst of a significant structural change right now.  Currently our educational structure is based on the organization of society that occurred at the end of the 19 th

36

century.  As society accelerated into the industrial age, everything about society incorporated the industrial model which was emerging.  What people forget to realize is that this transformation took a long time.  We like to think that this transformation occurred in just a few years or a couple decades.  The actual reality is that the change started in the late 18th century and did not codify until the early 20th century.  This is reflected in education (or schooling) as comprehensive high schools became ubiquitous in the early 20th century.  The structure of industrialization became embedded in schooling and it worked for the needs of society.  I am not forgetting the valid criticisms of the industrial model (including the racism of segregated schools); what I am saying is that the structure served a purpose.  The structure reflected a factory which implied conformity to rules and acquiescence to authority.

I believe we are now in a stage of transition to a new structure.  The foundational pieces are in place. Organizations are being created that can offer learning experience to students, schools and families that move beyond the current industrial model of school. These new educational platforms will allow students access to learning experiences that were unthinkable a few years ago. The new structure of education will involve schools becoming a place of facilitation where students access the many different ways of learning available to them.  The new school structure will not have teachers and buildings like we know them now.  There will be various platforms of learning that students will access.  These platforms will become the learning content and instructional spaces for students.  “School” will be a place of access of new learning, not a place of transmission of knowledge.  Education thought leaders that understand this transformation will position schools to be in the vanguard of societal change. There is a significant change occurring in the structure of learning…do we have the courage to direct this change

Duff:

“… a slave executes the purpose of another.”Plato

Plato’s words continue to haunt education, school and its purpose. Why does our education system exist? Are we slaves to the system? Is it to perpetuate our democracy? Is it as an industrialist might suggest filling the needs of a factory work force? Is it as a progressive might hope to grow thinkers? Is it to develop people subservient to authority? What is its purpose?

Dewey in Chapter 6 targets the purpose of learning, the why. He contends that without knowing the why, the purpose of an endeavor we are simply slaves to someone else’s thinking. We in a sense give up learning for control. We give up thinking for ease or comfort. We accept being told what to do. We become institutionalized.

What is the purpose of learning, of our education system? Do we have the patience, planning, discipline and courage to wait upon transformative shifts? I wonder? Perhaps to transform we must first figure out the why, the purpose of learning as we approach a post-modern era?

Dewey believed that purpose begins with an impulse, an idea, a desire, and recognition that something is just not right. Over time the impulse becomes a

37

passion. This passion leads to purpose but first it must filter through the consequences, the context in which it occurs. Through differentiation every purpose becomes unique, there is no longer room for a one size fits all mentality.

Purpose becomes a function of thinking an art that takes time. It is at the inter-section of the impulse, desire, consequence and thought that we find our why for learning for each entity and individual. In time we recognize that every learner, every community may well be different and function with a unique intent.

According to Dewey ideas move from an impulse to purpose flowing through the organization arriving at the teacher and child. It is at this point that experiences can be tailored to build upon experiences and in time meet the purpose, the desired outcome. To Dewey not defining the desired destination is a critical error.

Dewey’s thoughts are logical, make sense and are abstract, the question begs as to how this idea, this freedom is implemented in a mass education design. First, there must be the recognition that this effort takes time. Patience is something in short supply in a modern culture

How do you implement such an idea, a purpose and how long does it take? How long does it take to transform thought, language and design? Has anyone ever followed Dewey’s formula? To find our answers we look to history.

In 1750 according to his writings Thomas Jefferson began thinking about western expansion of the then non-existent United States. He had an impulse, an idea. Jefferson studied everything (which amounted to very little) about what lay west of the Alleghany Mountains and the Mississippi River. He dwelled on this passion, this impulse, and this idea for 52 years.

By 1802 Jefferson was President. This impulse for expansion had been processed through the consequences of not acting, the context of the time. Jefferson decided to act.

First he sought out an expedition leader. In doing this he turned to a young army officer Meriwether Lewis. He was a man of character and great courage. But most of all he was hungry to learn, he was coachable. Lewis had the personality to implement Jefferson’s idea.

As Jefferson and Lewis dialoged the idea was tested. They put their purpose through the ringer of consequence, the context within which they lived. The hurdles were daunting, the unknowns substantial.

In time this impulse became a purpose, a transcontinental journey for discovery. They defined an outcome, a destination, to go from the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean and to safely return. An accountability measure was set.

By 1803 Lewis was deep into planning the how of implementing the purpose. Indeed it appears that planning was his sole function. He was remarkably through.

Interestingly, Jefferson did not control the process. Instead he set parameters, outcomes and coached Lewis. It was this coaching and a clear outcome that with stood the trials of a two-year off the grid journey. Lewis needed all the knowledge he could get as the experience progressed.

In 1804 after two years of intense design the trip began. Over time as all journeys go the plan needed adjusting based upon what they were experiencing. Indeed change started before they ever arrived at the Missouri River, their jumping

38

off point. The experiences morphed from the beginning but the end outcome remained firm.

The end result of the Journey of Discovery is now history But, without an impulse in 1750, driven by patience, guided by competent leaders reacting to experiences, schooled through coaching, following an in-depth plan designed for flexible freedom to shift as unknowns appeared the United States might still be clinging to the Atlantic Ocean. Jefferson and Lewis transformed the world (Ambrose, Undaunted Courage, Simon and Shuster, 1996).

What does this history lesson have to do with Dewey? Simply, it took 56 years from impulse to transformation. It took time, patience, a persistent drive and courage.

Today there is re-birth of a dormant transformative idea, that of progressive education. The philosophy shifts education to a learning process tailored to a child’s experience verses our current mass static approach. It entails a learning process focused on experiences leading to experiences ending at a defined outcome. Dewey wrote of this idea in 1938. Assuming Dewey’s ideas are sound why have schools, the education system not transformed?

The answer is complex blending everything from money to politics, to higher education, to institutionalization. Perhaps our Achilles heal is our rush to implement rather than waiting and adjusting as Lewis and Jefferson did.

Will education, as we know it in 2016 transform? We will see? Often the energy derived from an idea like experienced or customized education leads to vitality that drives us to act before we have clearly defined our contextual purpose. We move forward without sufficient planning. We move forward without the patience. The concept becomes commercialized moving from thinking to someone else thinking for you - the how to aspect. As Dewey warns we end where we started with another system that pigeon holes us to one size fits all.

Transformative ideas start with an impulse whether in the system or with the teacher. These impulses become ideas and grow into a passionate purpose. Idea people, teachers and leaders briefly transform learning for their children. Then an obstacle appears and the idea goes dormant. This is when; just like Lewis and Clark you must traverse the unknown with flexibility, discipline and patience.

Dewey is right. His ideas in 1938 ring true today. The question is do we have the courage to create the passion, to plan, the discipline and the patience to wait upon the transformation?

39

Chapter 7

The Progressive Organization of Subject Matter

Or

Where Does the Momentum to Learn Begin,With Content or Learner?

40

Reflected thinking from Chapter 7:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

In time all those associated with learning must make a decision. A determination must be made between two countervailing philosophies. Is learning the product of applied pre-determined past facts and skill, hoping for a blended understanding and application? Or, is learning the product of the child’s experiences structured in such a way as to learn the needed facts and skills, resulting in a blended applicable understanding and application? It is just that simple.

General thoughts and foundation principles:The basics: simplify, simplify, simplify --- every part of the learning experienceThere is a difference between learning and educating:

o To learn: to gain knowledge or skill through experienceo To educate: to teach, to give information, to train some one to do

somethingContent is about understanding and linking past knowledge to present experiences pointed specifically to leveraging a future outcome. Simply put, what a learner knows is integrated to design a new experience that expands the learning base leading to a pre-determined outcome.Content should not be restricted to the realm of the past. Rather it should be a blending of the past into present need in pursuit of a future purpose.Progressive content is inherently built upon accepting a culture designed for freedom and trust of the leader, the teacher, the child and the parents. In our current system only those who, in time, can link divergent facts can truly learn?Progressive content is driven by the diverse needs of the learners as opposed to the myopic wants of the system

Simply puts:Keep it simple, target a pre-defined future outcome / goal / objective, understand the learners capacity of past knowledge and present need and then design experiences that guide the child to expand his or her knowledge and understanding. Do that and everything else including mass testing will, in time take care of itself!

41

Duff:

In an ideal world everything works ideally. We do not live in an ideal world. Our education system is less than ideal for many yet it serves millions of children. Is less than ideal for our children good enough?

Dewey is convinced that in an ideal learning system the facts and truths would align with the experiences. Educators would be afforded the trust and freedom to custom design learning that is child centric. Is this utopia built by Dewey possible?

Nine young men build a hovercraft from scratch. The project, the experience they tackle fits with their knowledge their skill base. They had the latent skill to achieve. But somewhere within their background they had acquired the requisite skills. How does this need for skill for foundation background fit with Dewey? Where does the learner learn the necessary independence, the technology acumen to Google it, the math, the aerodynamics and on and on? Experiences can be built of that there is certainty but what about the skills or are they a part of the opportunity, the curriculum?

Indeed where do these boys learn risk; the option of failure in a system that does not and never has embraced failure. It is evident that we do not learn that we do not create without failing. In our traditional education system the fear of failure is endemic. Should struggle and failure be a part of the curriculum? How does that align with macro testing designed to achieve 100% success when 100% of anything on-going is a statistical impossibility. How does this all get resolved. Dewey is silent in this realm.

But we digress so back to our nine year old boys. The hovercraft was a great learning experience. They were successful. Unfortunately once the project was done, it was done. No next experience was planned to build upon the momentum of the first. What would the next experience be, how would the two link?

No linkage, no next opportunity existed. The boys returned to a fact based learning environment. So, how can we customize, move toward experience based learning in our rudimentary test based culture? We must wonder is it even possible?

The answer is yes, but it is self evident that we must transform our thinking, we must trust and that is difficult. The simple question with a complex answer is how?

In 1984 a semi young graduate student met his advisor at the University of Pennsylvania. It was his inordinate gain to be assigned to one of the great minds in education, Allan Glatthorn. At the time Dr. Glatthorn was considered a sage in the world of curriculum. To suggest he was unique, that he thought different is an understatement.

Dewy espouses the progressive organization of subject matter. Glatthorn emphasized progressive simplicity. He was a curriculum minimalist teaching that subject matter was nestled in a clearly defined set of core objectives, in Dewey’s end outcome. Glatthorn characterized the end outcome, the diploma as a guarantee. His

42

question was simple, “What should a child be guaranteed for the time he or she spent with you?”

Once these guarantees or end outcomes are defined the courses, the grade level curriculum build up, outcome-to-outcome, experience-to-experience. Simply put K outcomes, goals, core objectives feed to 1, to to 2 and so on. Mush of this exists in our highly aligned curriculums today. So, why do we not listen to Dewey or Glatthorn? Can their ideas work?

In 1995 a School District leadership decided to minimalize the curriculum. They followed Glatthorn’s advice and simplified everything to a set of end objectives. The organization of subject matter became a simple set of guaranteed outcomes at each level. These leaders took a risk moving toward the progressive when the world was transitioning to strict traditionalism

The leadership made a decision to let the teachers teach. They afforded the teachers the freedom to create the experiences necessary to reach the objective in their classes, departments or grade levels. Accountability was made clear; the teachers’ performance would be based upon the success of their children achieving the outcome. The resulting data would then be peer compared and adjustments made.

This simplification worked. Every metric in the district over time improved. Children achieved well beyond the economic and background expectation of the community.

This decision was not without risk. The organization experienced a lot of failing forward. But, the decision to trust the teachers, to afford them the freedom to design relevant experiences worked. As trust grew thinking changed and transformation began.

Dewey is right, true learning comes from experiences built upon experiences. There is logic to it. The experiences can be a simple as a great open-ended question or as complex as a hovercraft.

An endeavor of this magnitude requires a shift in leader attitude. This change described was a practice of patience. It requires re-design of time blended with courage and communication and an unwavering belief in what you are doing.

In my experience with a multitude of teachers like Tiffany and Autumn I have found they rarely if ever fail the children. When told what is expected and given the freedom to teach they can and will go to amazing lengths to help a child succeed. That is their gift and we should give them every opportunity to use it

After all is this not what learning is about - helping a child succeed?

Tom:

“The educator by the very nature of his work is obliged to see his present work in terms of what it accomplishes, or fails to accomplish, for a future whose objects are linked

with those of the present” (p. 76)

43

How is the this for a question for starting an essay: What is the purpose of education in America?  This simple question is seldom asked and easily glossed over with platitudes (education is for “democracy”; education is to help a student get a job, etc..).  Does it change your reaction to the question when we slightly alter the question to: What is the purpose of learning in America?  The former question implies a view of our society based on old, educational structures, while the latter question implies new learning structures.  The old learning structures have as its focus content.  The new learning structures have as its focus the learning experience.  The old structure obsesses with curriculum (what must be taught when), while the new learning structure obsesses over the learner and the learning experience.  Old structures require educators (and school systems) to constantly refer to the past for their guidance and sustenance.  New learning structures use the past only to help understand the present and leverage that understanding to create learning experiences which will help learners understand the future. Learning experiences, centered on the learner, is not anchored in the past.  Rather learning facilitators use an understanding of the past to inform the present which help them craft learning experiences that will help the learner create a framework for the future.

The content of our current (old structure) school system centers on what is taught---the curriculum.  The significance of curriculum in preventing a change from the education structures to learning structures cannot be understated.  Curriculum impacts evaluation of students, teachers, principals, superintendents, schools and school districts.  It determines where (room number, time of day) a student (and teacher) will spend their time in school.  Curriculum drives and entire industry (textbooks).  Curriculum prevents the learner, and the learning experience, from being at the center of our school system.  I have been in districts where every elementary grade-level teacher across the district must be on the same page of the textbook on the same day. This is called “implementing the curriculum with fidelity” kids be damned!  This illusion of sound education practice lulls educators into not reflecting how the student becomes a bit player in the proper implementation of content.

This is not to say the content is not important…of course it is. My argument is that content has become THE most important facet in current education structures.  School systems are laser focused on content because the livelihood of the adults are at stake if the students do not prove that they have “learned” the content.  This is an understandable reaction to our current education structure. The challenge for reflective educators is to bring better balance between content and the learner.  Once an equilibrium is created, we can start the discussion about how to transition from education structures to learning structures.  Deemphasizing curriculum and reemphasizing the learner and the learning experience is not easy.  In many ways our society has become blind to other options in learning for our students…we simply cannot think of another way.  However, if we truly want to

44

answer the question, (what is the purpose of learning in America?), then we will grapple with content, structures and learning experiences.

Chapter 8

Experience the Means and Goal of Education

Or

Think!

45

Reflected thinking from Chapter 8:

The critical basic premise that must be accepted for adopting a customized or experienced based philosophy:

The first step, the most important step is to think, to think about the purpose of learning. We must think for if we stop thinking it is inevitable that learning will regress. It is through thinking, innovating, problem solving, dialog that we drive the transformation of the purpose of what we call school.

General thoughts and foundation principlesWe must transform from an assembly mind set to the individualWe need multiple methodologies to meet the learning needs of all involved - no longer does one size fit allAbsolutism, one way, one size, one test no longer works, assuming it ever didWe must shift to the needs of the learner, child and adult and away from the wants of the systemLearning its end goal should be designed to move a person forward as opposed to reinforcing the status quoWe must mess with the magic of tradition, habit and urban legendWe, the educators must accept responsibility for every child. No longer can we accept invisible forgotten throwaway child. Dewey might ask us to assume that:

o Learning occurs everywhere at anytimeo Learning may be least likely in formal schoolo The goal, the outcome must be defined but getting to the desired point

results from freedom for and trust for all involvedo We must truly grapple with the big question: what should the cultural

purpose be for learning in the 22nd centuryTransformation / shift is a product of courage on a journey taken one step at a timeWe must be careful for stupid never solves stupid

Simply puts:Being timid as we hurtle from a modern industrialized culture to a postmodern information based culture is simply unacceptable

46

Tom:

Experience and Education Chapter 8: Lessons for MCLMass Customized Learning is a direct descendant of the theory of learning espoused by Dewey in Experience and Education.   MCL is a lens through which one can view the learning environment.  At the center of the MCL learning ecosystem is the learning experience.  All of us learn within the context of our current life experiences rooted on our society and communities.  Meaningful learning occurs when the learning experience encompasses the reality of the student.  When the learning experience is truly at the center of our learning system unnecessary aspects of what we currently do in education will become less important.  For example, building a "master schedule" in any school is an adult oriented activity. You have to "fit" the students into the needs of the teacher schedules.  When the learning experience is at the center of the ecosystem, scheduling does not create barriers for learners; rather, it offers opportunities to design learning experiences for kids that are meaningful.

I recently read a book where the author challenged his readers to "look at what they do for the first time".  What would someone that has no knowledge of your profession say about your assumptions, actions and systems if they simply saw it for the first time?  I think about this a lot.  You can make your own list of assumptions that you take for granted in our education world and I will share with you my educational assumptions. 

We assume that important learning only occurs in a school building.  Architecturally, schools and prisons are synonymous.  Physical, intellectual and emotional controls are goals of our current system.   Learning is a linear process that can be measured.  Grading tells us all we

need to know about students...and the list can go on. Dewey encourages educators to grapple with big questions like "what is education?”  It is difficult for educators to "look at education" for the first time but only when we do will we start to change our assumptions and practice.

The work of creating a system where the learning experience is at the center of the ecosystem is extremely difficult.  The process of systemic change will be hard for parents, students and educators. The important work of change requires courage. Courage to look at what we currently do in our education system and how we allow students to not be engaged.  Courage to challenge long held assumptions of the role of a student, teacher, administrator and physical school building.  Timidity at this juncture is not acceptable.  If we are timid, someone will be reading about our philosophy of education 75 years from now and will wonder why nothing changed.

47

Duff:

There is an old saying perhaps we should resurrect it. It goes like this, ‘Education has all the resources it needs to do what it needs to do. What must be decided is what we need it to do.” Without belaboring the point education is a catch all for the ills that affect us but is that its role? Or, is its purpose to insure a leaner confident, literate and able to think in a manner that enhances his or her chances of living a productive life however that is defined by him or her. If the second premise is accurate that alone changes the landscape or possibility.

Dewey’s premise defines what he believes education is to be doing, it echoes through time to this day in the customization movement. Customizing is a shift in the end result of learning, of education. It transforms the purpose from a methodology of assembly to that of the individual. This is a cataclysmic divergence in accepted scientific thought in 2106. It could shake the system yet, we must be careful that customization does not become an either or system, for then we will be back where we are and the cycle will continue. After all stupid never solves stupid it merely brings you back to where you were!

Interestingly, Dewey neither discounts nor minimizes the belief of others. He recognizes the varied philosophies that drive education and learning. Perhaps there is part of the answer to current struggles. One-size methodologies whether in the traditional classroom, individual learning pattern or blended platform of education no longer meet our personal or corporate needs.

Maybe, just maybe our one size mentality, our focus on data analysis and a scientific basis for instruction is in part responsible for the condition we find today. We treat everyone the same from child, to teacher, to administrator. They are not clones.

Add to this the reality that the state of our union accepts as normal 4.6 million children living in poverty with little to no hope of anything better (Edin and Shaffer, $2.00 a Day, Living on Almost Nothing in America, Houghton & Mifflin 2015). But, how can Dewey’s theory help us over come numbers like those mentioned, numbers that grow by the year and at the same time continue to advance the great parts of our culture - innovation, risk and personal drive. How?

Dewey avoids polarizing language and the voice of either or, he is an enigma in our current discussions. He travels a road distant from absolutism. Perhaps what is needed is a way of thinking, a system that is as customized as Dewey suggests. A system an culture of learning driven by the needs of a child as opposed to the needs of industry, university and the myriad of other interests.

This idea is not a great revolution rather it is a conscious decision to think of the one as opposed to the mass and in so doing to insure what is best for the individual. The simple question, ‘What is the best experience for this child?’ should be the exception rather than the rule. But that is a tectonic shift in thinking.

48

Transformation of our thinking as opposed to a way is what Dewey suggests. He ardently avoids the idea of a system, as we know it. What he recommends is a continual discerning of our future, our impact. This requires a return to the why, the very purpose of school, of education, of learning as we progress from a modern to post-modern era, a time in which the children we impact today will live, the 22nd century.

To achieve this end we must transform how we treat teachers and they must transform their thinking. We must mess with the magic of tradition, habit and urban legend. We must accept responsibility for the child and the outcome. We can no longer labor under the umbrella of invisibility blaming the home, the child, the world.

It is self evident that all of what Dewey, Schwahn, Spady, E.D. Hirsch progressives and traditionalists suggest is possible. We are only limited by our own imagination and courage. It is clear that centric to Dewey’s ideal is what a leader believes. If leaders in learning remain institutionalized little progress is to be made. We then are only tinkering with the system as opposed to advancing the cause of learning.

In 1938 Dewey is calling for action. The same call is being repeated in 2016. But is this a call or rebellion; it is a call of diverse thought, a call of courage? The status quo is no longer acceptable perhaps we need an actual rebellion. We must do better for our children, from those with every advantage to those living on $2 a day.

In my 45 years in education I am convinced that the Jim’s, Tiffany’s, Autumn’s, Jennifer’s, Janel’s, Leann’s, Jess’s, Barb’s and Tod’s, the young leaders of learning from the classroom to the board room can do what needs to be done, if they have the opportunity. The questions are simplistic and eloquent. Are they to be given freedom and trusted or will they continue to comply in a system of blatant control? Do they have the courage to act to transform? Only they can answer these questions.

I end this reflection with several paraphrased quotes from Dewey’s Experience and Education. You are encouraged to reflect on his words.

‘Education regardless of its structure, to accomplish its end must be based on experience, the actual life experience of some individual’

‘Everyone in 1938 conservative and radical in education are profoundly discontented with the current state of education.’

‘We must either move backward into more facts, more rote, deeper into the scientific era or to something else based on experience’.

‘In our future education is either going to stagnate preparing an assembly line way of acting or transform to producing a literate thinking people.’

‘The only way progressive education, child centric learning can fail is through educators lack of dedication to be faithful to progressive belief.’

49

‘Transforming education is not an easier road to follow indeed it is far more difficult than doing that which has always been done.’

Final thoughts:

We trust you have enjoyed this reflection. We certainly had a good time developing it. It is essential time to time to pause for even a moment to reflect on a classic work like Experience and Education; we do far to little of that in our ever-increasing institutionalized world.

The issue we face is that of institutionalization. In the Movie Shawshank Redemption an older man Brooks is paroled. He is a stranger in a strange land. In time Books simply can no longer cope. He commits suicide. Back at the prison Andy, a young prisoner, is talking to a season veteran, Red. Andy asks why, why did Brooks kill himself? Red explains that Brooks had been a prisoner for 45 years. For those so many years he had been told what to do, he had lost his ability to think for himself. When he stopped thinking others thought for him. Brooks had lost a precious gift we all take for granted. In time fear crept into his life. He had no reason to go on living.

The danger faced in traditional education is not in content, or structure, or one-way solutions it is in the reality of leaders being institutionalized. The threat we face is in simply accepting because it is a path of least resistance, political expediency or being politically correct.

To stimulate your thinking we added two endings to think about. The first is a comparison between traditional and progressive thought. The second is list ideas, of think about challenges you might want to use to stimulate dialog within your situation.

Tom and Duff

Traditional Progressive

School is a preparation for life. School is a part of life.

Learners are passive absorbers of information and

authority.

Learners are active participants, problem solvers,

and planners.

Teachers are sources of information and authority. Teachers are facilitators, guides who foster

thinking.

Parents are outsiders and uninvolved. Parents are the primary teachers, goal setters,

and planners, and serve as resources.

Community is separate from school, except for

funding.

Community is an extension of the classroom.

50

Decision-making is centrally based and

administratively delivered.

Decision-making is shared by all constituent

groups.

Program is determined by external criteria,

particularly test results.

Program is determined by mission, philosophy,

and goals for graduates.

Learning is linear, with factual accumulation and

skill mastery.

Learning is spiral, with depth and breadth as

goals.

Knowledge is absorbed through lectures,

worksheets, and texts.

Knowledge is constructed through play, direct

experience, and social interaction.

Instruction is linear and largely based on correct

answers.

Instruction is related to central questions and

inquiry, often generated by the children.

Disciplines, particularly language and math, are

separated.

Disciplines are integrated as children make

connections.

Skills are taught discretely and are viewed as

goals.

Skills are related to content and are viewed as

tools.

Assessment is norm-referenced, external, and

graded.

Assessment is benchmarked, has many forms,

and is progress-oriented.

Success is competitively based, derived from recall

and memory, and specific to a time/place.

Success is determined through application over

time, through collaboration.

Products are the end point. Products are subsumed by process

considerations.

Intelligence is a measure of linguistic and

logical/mathematical abilities.

Intelligence is recognized as varied, includes the

arts, and is measured in real-life problem-solving.

School is a task to be endured. School is a challenging and fun part of life.

Source: Robert G. Peters, with thanks to the books Schools of Quality, by John Jay Bonstigl,

and In Search of Understanding, by Martin C. Brooks and Jaqueline Grennon, Independent

Schools.

51

At PLDC we are passionate about innovation. When we have the opportunity it is our tendency to first coach individuals and groups in defining the problem. That simple task or it would seem simple task can be difficult. Once we discern the problem we next challenge leaders to think of solutions through a simple lens. We ask that they process ideas with no barriers, that they ask and answer a question, “If I could I would?” The concepts spurred are amazing.

With the question of what would you do, if you were thinking of customizing how would you mess with the magic of:

Time

Staffing

School size, indeed school itself

Curriculum

13 years

An individual plan for each child

Finding the right people

Establishing a staffing value of be good or be gone

Of inducting new people

Professional Learning

Accountability - end outcomes

Reflective self-accountability

Teacher Agency

Student Agency

One size fits all and individual opportunity

52