Race to Redesign Education for Personalized Learning

While much of the national education attention has been focused on Race to the Top (RttT), a growing movement is focused on the race to redesign our education system before it becomes too outdated to meet our students’ and nation’s needs in today’s digital society and knowledge economy. The reforms in RttT are necessary, but most would agree are not sufficient. We must educate to innovate, but just as importantly, we must innovate to educate. In response, SIIA, in collaboration with ASCD and the Council of Chief State School Officers, is convening 150 education leaders for the invitation-only “Innovate to Educate: A Symposium on [Re]Design for Personalized Learning.”

Leading foundations (e.g., Nellie Mae), associations (e.g., CCSSO) and non-profits (e.g., RISC) are challenging our long-standing notions of education, while local (e.g., Adams 50 School District, CO) and state education leaders are accepting the challenge. Recognition that our assembly-line, agrarian-calendar based model (symbolized by a classrooom of students in rows of desks) is unchanged since the industrial age a century ago and calls for anytime, anywhere, anypace personalized learning are not new. What has changed? As the new U.S. Department of Education Report “Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology” recognizes, what has changed is our ability to respond with an ever more sophisticated arsenal of research, alternative models and technologies. A number of initiatives are leading the way, but as is often the case in education, they are too often isolated and not at scale.

The SIIA-ASCD-CCSSO Symposium will bring together SIIA members with national, state and local education leaders. They will develop a common vision, share models and practices, identify key policy and systems change enablers, and spec the technology, curriculum and human resources needed to power this student-centered customized learning system. Perhaps more importantly, they will continue building a community of practice needed to further develop the vision, models and tools and an action network to drive the change of policy and practice.

“The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly”

In the last few weeks, federal and state officials have introduced a plethora of plans and proposals with implications for education and the role of technology that is perhaps unprecedented in scale and scope.  The latest is the “National Broadband Plan: Connecting America” released today by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), in response to a Congressional request in the Recovery Act a year ago.  The others: the National Education Technology Plan, titled “Transforming American Education: Learning Powered by Technology” released two weeks ago,  the Obama Administration’s ESEA “blueprint for reform” and the NGA-CCSSO Common Core standards, not to mention the final Investing in Innovation (i3) rules.  The timing is largely coincidental.  The question: What does it all mean?

A few observations specific to education technology and SIIA members:

-The Obama Administration (including the independent FCC) seems to view technology as an important means to educating our students to maintain our global competitiveness.

- The Obama Administration is proposing a new federal policy path to realizing that goal, proposing to increase the E-Rate, eliminate targeted DoED funding through the Enhancing Education Through Technology (EETT) program, infuse technology in other ESEA programs, and look to “supply-side solutions” such as investment in open educational resources (OER) and interoperability as well as potentially far-reaching regulation around copyright, technology standards, etc.

- It is unclear whether the Obama Administration’s vision for transforming education through technology is a priority or sufficiently backed by “demand-side” targeted federal policies and investments (i.e., those directly supporting educational agencies and teachers around technology) needed to help lead the nation’s education system in this new direction.

- It is less clear how the U.S. Congress, not to mention education leaders, will react in that their actions are largely need to legislate and enact these policies and recommendations.  For example, “Many of the FCC’s proposals are short on details, and lawmakers and the agency can accept or reject any number of the ideas.”  [Read more...]