Education Innovation

Failure Is An Option: Ideas and Failure In The Open Model of Education

What do you get when you combine education with the books Here Comes Everybody and Wikinomics, with Lego, Saddleback Church, new ideas, a website for solving problems, failure, and a mining corporation? Let's put them in the Education Innovation blender and see?

Adding to my previous posts (1 and 2)  on what I call the Open Model of Education. Why is the open model so powerful? Clay Shirky, author of Here Comes Everybody, discussed the advantages of open models. In this case, open source movements. Open source movements have several powerful advantages that education could leverage to improve itself. 

One advantage of the open source movement is that it is not an organization in the typical sense. It doesn’t have employees, it doesn’t make capital investments, and it doesn’t control resources. The advantage is that it highly tolerant of failure. Open source reduces the cost of failure because so many ideas are brought to the table.

“…open source relies on the ‘publish-then-filter’ pattern. In traditional organizations, trying anything is expensive, even if just in staff time to discuss the idea, so someone must make some attempt to filter the successes from the failures in advance. In open systems, the cost of trying something is so low that handicapping the likelihood of success is often an unnecessary distraction.”

In the Closed Model of Education that I have discussed previously, education is limited because the ideas that a school or district can consider can come from only a limited number of sources, usually teachers, administrators, and consultants. A great deal of thought must be put into the consideration of ideas because the time and cost of failure are so high. Time spent with meetings, staff training, and materials, has a cost. This means the filter for ideas is very high. Only those ideas that seem to have the most benefit will be implemented, though there is no way to know in advance that one of the ideas picked will bring the desired benefit, and one of the ideas left on the table could be the most effective and beneficial.

The Open Model of Education draws its ideas from a greater number of sources, including, and most importantly, the student. A wider net is cast for ideas, more ideas are implemented, and the ones that work will receive more resources, while the ones that fail can be quickly dropped. Because resources are only directed at proven ideas, this model essentially allows failure to cost nothing. Failure for free. But the chance of coming upon a better idea is increased due to the shear number of sources and ideas.

“Open system, by reducing the cost of failure, enable their participants to fail like crazy, building on the successes as they go.”

The open system has the advantage of exploring multiple possibilities.

“…the idea is that for any problem or goal, there is a vast area of possibilities to explore but few valuable spots within that environment to discover. When a company or indeed any organization finds a strategy that works, the drive to adopt it and stick with it is strong. Even if there is a better strategy out there, finding is can be prohibitively expensive.”

Our current Closed Model of Education is clearly locked into a few strategies and models that drive everything. Teaching takes place at a designated place and time, and it provided by designated people.

The Open Model of Education blends the sources of teaching to focus on the learning of the student. Learning, as opposed to teaching, can take place anywhere, at anytime, and can be provided by many people. It is this system that can bring many more ideas to the table. The current education system judges many ideas on whether that idea fits within the current construct of the education system. If the idea does not fit, the idea is not adopted. Those ideas that are adopted have been severely filtered in the hopes on ensuring success.

The Open Model of Education, or Clay Shirky’s open system, allow for many more participants, lowers the filtering of ideas, and is much more tolerant of failure because of the flexibility of the system. Ideas that fail are dropped instantly, and new ones adopted. It would be hard to say that failed ideas are dropped as quickly in education. Usually failed ideas have personnel attached to them, causing union issues, and resources that have been purchased, and possible even capital costs. This makes ideas difficult to drop on a dime.

Further because the Open Model allows participants from many areas to participate, the chances of great ideas and solutions are increased. In the book Wikinomics: How Mass Collboration Changes Everything, the authors describe in detail how organizations from Lego to mining corporation Goldcorp have opened their systems to the public and reaped the benefits that come from this openness. Websites like Innocentive.com open problems up to others to help solve and give cash rewards. Could you imagine what would happen if education opened itself to the public and gave cash rewards for great ideas?  Saddleback Church says to its member, if you have an idea, let’s do it. They offer help where they can, but they allow the member to come up with and implement the idea. One member had an idea for a ministry from people struggling with addictions. That ministry has become a worldwide ministry called Celebrate Recovery. Other ideas went nowhere and failed. But in allowing many ideas, having a low filter, they hit upon one of the most successful ministry ideas in recent years. It is the organizational model and mindset that is described in Wikinomics and displayed in Goldcorp, Lego, and Saddleback Church that education should look to.

The Closed System of Education does not tolerate failure, therefore restricting the quality and quantity of ideas and the chance for a superior idea. The Open Model of Education is much more tolerant of failure which results in a greater number of ideas and a greater chance of finding the superior idea.

Catalytic Questions:

How might you come at this issue from a different direction to get a different response?  What underlying principles are at work here?

In what ways could you shake the thinking of those in the education establishment? What might this look like?

What examples could you substitute to get your message across?

In what areas do you see opportunity for developing more openness in your school or your district?

Who is going to resist these ideas? How can you prepare for and mitigate their resistance?

Who is going to support these ideas? How can you leverage their support of these ideas?

Where could you focus your energy and ideas to make change?

In what ways could you use the disadvantages for of the Closed Model as advantages for support of the Open Model?

If your school or district were to be transformed into an Open Model school or district, could you let go of the past and adopt the new way of thinking? Does you answer impact your thinking or support for either model?

What problems might more openness create?

Open Model of Education vs. Closed Model of Education

What do you get when you combine a starfish, Napster, Kazaa, home-schools, spiders, organizations, internships, the Department of Education, and e-learning? Let's put them in the Education Innovation blender and take a look?

In my previous post, I explored the idea of what I call the Open Model of Education (OME) and the Closed Model of Education (CME).

Oddly enough, I began re-reading a book I read last summer, The Starfish and The Spider: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations, by Ori Brafman and Rod A. Beckstrom.

 

As I dove in, I was happily surprised to see right in Chapter 1, a discussion that tied in directly to my thinking on OME vs. CME.

“A centralized organization is easy to understand. Think of any major company or governmental agency . You have a clear leader who’s in charge, and there’s a specific place where decisions are made (the boardroom, the corporate headquarters, city hall). Nevins calls this organizational type coercive because the leaders call the shots."

Education today, attempts to control where students learn, what they learn, when they learn, and whom they learn from. Our educational system is the very definition of a centralized organization. The federal Department of Education tells the states what to do. State departments of education tell the counties what to do, counties tell the districts what to do, districts tell the principals, the principals tell the teachers, and the teachers tell the students. It is very structured, very systematic, very controlled, very rigid, and very closed.

“In a decentralized organization, there’s no clear leader, no hierarchy, and no headquarters.”
“Nevins calls this an open system, because everyone is entitled to make his or her own decisions. This doesn’t mean that a decentralized system is the same as anarchy. There are rules and norms, but these aren’t enforced by any one person. Rather, the power is distributed among all the people and across geographic regions.”

If you view the student as a leaders of their own learning, then they have the ability to decided for themselves the what, when, where, who, and how of their education. They must follow and meet certain expectations and norms, but they are not controlled by a centralized organization. A student is free to blend normal brick-and-mortar school, with home-school, with e-learning or virtual learning, occupational or trade schools, with other opportunities such as travel, trips to museums, internships, volunteering, etc. This blend is what I call the Open Model of Education. It closely matches the spirit of what the authors describe in the decentralized organization.

“Flexibility-shared power-ambiguity”

The time has come to stop resisting home school, occupational school, e-learning and virtual schooling, and view them as partners. Resisting is not going to work, and can create a situation in which each is working in isolation and competing against each other. Think of the recording industry fighting sites like Napster, Kazaa, or eMule.

The time has come to see all of us as sharing a role and a responsibility in the education of our students. We should be partnering with each other, not resisting or fighting against the other. If education or the student is the goal, there are multiple routes and means of reaching that education. If teaching is the goal, we will all fight for the limited resources or money, materials, time, and most importantly, the students themselves.

The time for the blended model of the Open Model of Education (OME) has arrived.

Catalytic Questions:

In what ways can we view each other as partners in the education of a student and not rivals in the teaching of a student?

What mistakes have we made in the past that we can learn from to improve education in the future?

What hunches do you have that can be applied to improving the future of education? How might things change or look like if your hunches are correct?

What “sacred cows” must be sacrificed for the betterment of our education system?

How might your persistence make a difference?

How might reversing our/your current approach or philosophy to education make an impact?

In the current era of education bashing, what is still viable and productive? In what ways could be take the good and throw out the bad?

In what ways are our typical approaches and view getting in the way of what could be possible?

What unintended consequences might come from the implementation of the OME? What unintended consequences do we already suffer from in the CME? What can do be done to prepare for or repair these consequences?

What underlying principles are at work in this discussion?

Recommended Reading: 

The Questions We Choose To Ask and Answer: The Open Model of Education

The Tutor Mentor Connection blog

The Starfish and The Spider wiki

Book Review: The Starfish and the Spider

The Starfish and the Spider:

Education for the 21st Century: A Charter

14 Trends Of The New Educational Reality (Part 1-Trends 1-7)

What do you get when you combine a meatball sundae, home/school communication, brand management, the New York Times best sellers list, Google, homework, outsourcing, and the definitions of literacy? Let’s put them in the Education Innovation blender and find out.

In his book Meatball Sundae, Seth Godin describes 14 Trends of New Marketing. I put these trends under the lens of education and call them the New Reality.

Trend 1: Direct Communication and Commerce Between Producers and Consumers
Consumers demand speed. Businesses need to respond quickly to consumer demands or the consumer will go elsewhere. Consumers can now connect directly to the top of an organization. They expect a response. Technology is changing the way organizations and customers interact.

Our students and parents live in a world with the ability to communicate with an organization and expect a quick response. Is the use of technology in your school changing the way you interact with students and parents? Are you responding to the needs of your students and parents and communicating that response effectively? If students and parents can communicate directly with the school, how important is the response you give back? How quick do you respond? Do you view it as a burden or an opportunity to spread your educational vision and message?

Trend 2: Amplification Of The Voice Of The Consumer and Independent Authorities.
Every interaction with a consumer is an interaction with a critic (or potential critic).
Everybody, student, parent, community member has a voice that can be amplified through technology. What are they going to say about your school?  What are they going to say about your educational brand? (You do have a brand, whether you like it or not.)

The web remembers forever. A poorly written email can be posted in minutes to the web.  Blogs allow students, parents, and community members into instant publishers. YouTube allows them to become movie producers. What are the publishing or producing about you? You may have a point of view on an issue, but who is better able to get their message out, you or the student run blog posting pictures, YouTube videos, and podcasts? Your schools reputation is always on the line and on-line. What is being said about you?

Trend 3: Need For An Authentic Story As The Number Of Sources Increases
Stories spread, not facts. So what stories are being told about your school and your teachers? A story is a symbol of who you are. Do you know your symbol? Do you care? Why would anyone want to go to your school? What makes your teachers so great?

Technology is allowing for students and parents to share their stories about you. Are you sharing your own stories? Do you have an educational brand that you trying to spread? What kind of message is your school trying to spread? There is a story about your school, the question is, is it your story or somebody else’s version?

Trend 4: Extremely Short Attention Spans Due To Clutter
There is a multitude of choices and a deluge of interruptions for students and parents. Commercials went from a minute to thirty seconds to, in some cases, three seconds. A bestseller was on the New York bestsellers list for 22 weeks, now it’s on the list for two. Books are shorter. Not enough time to read the book, listen to the audio version in the car. YouTube has over 7 million video. Most are only watched for less than 10 seconds. If it’s not good we move on.

That is the world you student is living in. If the don’t like it, the switch it, drop it, or change it. They don’t have to wait for something better. They are in control.

What about in the classroom? How much time do you get to grab their attention, make it meaningful, and engage before they drop you? They may be forced to sit there, but they aren’t forced to learn. The world is catering to their desire to move on. Your teaching can’t afford to be good enough. It must be great or it won’t cut through all the clutter or the world they are living in. You can’t count on their attention and engagement. You have to compete for it and win it.

Trend 5: The Long Tail
“Any market of people with sufficient resources will get very pick on you.”
People want choice. Students and parents want choice. Education does not have to provide that choice. (For now) Students have to go to school. They have to go to school in your district. They may be allowed to move within your district, but for the most part, they are assigned to you. You didn’t have to earn them, they were just sent to you. But you can’t rely on that forever.

Your students and parents live in a world where they can find nearly any book they want at Amazon. More of them are watching YouTube videos than the top ten television shows. Online they can find a hundred times more inventory than a retail store. You can find nearly anything on Google. The digital world means products are easy to store and easy to customize to the individual need.

So, if they can find nearly anything they want or need online and have it customized to their needs, what makes you think they need your school? They can find the learning they want online, learn what they want, when they want, where they want, and at the pace they want. So why should they want you? What is it about your educational brand or story that makes them want to choose you?

Trend 6: Outsourcing
You assign the project or the paper and then your student goes home and out sources the work online to some student in India or Sri Lanka. Why not? A report you want, a report you shall get. It costs your students and parents to connect with people in any part of the world to share skills, abilities, and resources. Homework for sale via the Internet is a reality. There is not sense trying to stop it, it’s already out there. The question is how can you adjust your assignment to make them meaningful and engaging so the student won’t outsource the work.

It’s not just assignments. When I can hire online tutors, watch educational videos, or get language lessons through my web cam, outsourcing teaching is here too. What are you doing about that reality?  Maybe just you are just going to rely on the old model of, “You have to go here. You live here.”  That may work for you, but that is not the world your students are growing up in.

Trend 7: Google And The Dicing Of Everything
Having the teacher in your classroom is no longer a reason to believe that is where the teaching and learning is going to happen. Students are a few clicks away from being connected to people all around the world who are willing to teach and tutor.

Google has allowed us to find any piece of information or facts we would ever want to know. In fact, in the new reality, it is not the piece of information or fact; it’s how to find it. Students don’t want to memorize names, dates, formulas, etc., that they can just look up in Google. Why? Why memorize what is right at my fingertips? They key is learning how to find the facts or information. Google has changed literacy? It not longer memorizing the “what”, but knowing where and how to find the “what.”

We will look at Trends 8-14 in a later post.

Catalytic Questions:

How might your view of parent/student communication change if you knew it was being used to judge your school or yourself?

In what ways are you using technology to communicate with students and parents to spread your educational vision and brand? 

Is it effective? What might you change, add, or subtract from what you are currently doing?

Do you know what is being said about you and your school online?

Do you have an educational brand and are you managing it effectively?

In what ways are you or might you leverage technology to communicate your educational brand and your school’s story?

What is your school’s story?

How might your teaching change if you understood that you must compete and win your students’ attention?

What might this look like in the classroom?

Are you relying on the current lack of choice parents and students have, or are you thinking and preparing yourself for the power of choice they will soon demand?

If students and parents could choose, why would they choose you?
How might your thinking on assignments change based on the knowledge that students can outsource the work?

What might you do differently?

In what ways might the definition of knowledge and literacy change based on what Google has provided to every student?

Recommended Reading:

Literacy in the 21st Century

Why My Gym Is The Future of Education

The Questions We Choose To Ask and Answer: The Open Model of Education

The Future of Education

The Future of Education: Send the Lecture Home

Killing In The Name of Education: An Analysis Of Creativity- Part 1

I found this video to be very insightful and interesting. It blends several popular videos on the issue into a comprehensive exploration of creativity in education.

Brain Rules Part 1: Increase Test Scores with Exercise

I have enjoyed reading Brian Rules by John Medina.

Chapter 1 is titled Exercise and John explains that our brains were made for walking. And by walking, he means, 12 miles a day. So, if you want to improve your thinking you have got to move.

The implications of this idea for education are interesting. John explains that in our search for higher test scores, many districts have resorted to canceling P.E programs or have canceled recess.

“Given the powerful cognitive effects of physical activity, this makes no sense.”

I have seen schools that have removed the afternoon recess in the hopes of increasing instructional time. Sadly, those schools that don’t have effective P.E programs are also doing a disservice to their students according to this line of thinking.

“Cutting of physical exercise—they very activity most likely to promote cognitive performance—to do better on a test score is like trying to gain weight by starving yourself.”

John asks why don’t schools have recess twice a day and simply let our students where gym clothes all day long.  Another of his ideas is having students walking at a 1 to 2 mile per hour pace on treadmills while learning a math lesson or an English language arts lesson.

Catalytic Questions:
Could a district’s creativity and innovativeness be correlated with their employees’ fitness levels?

In what ways might we increase student and teacher fitness?

In what ways might we find more opportunities for students and teachers to exercise?

If you knew you had to increase the P.E time of your students by 30 or 60 minutes a week, how would you accomplish it?

Novel Ideas:
Principals and teachers who do P.E with their class each day.

Tread mills in the classroom.

Recommended Reading:
Brain Rules

Think Lab: Ironic: The Ideal "Anti-Brain" Environment

Thinking Allowed: More on how cool the brain is

Presentation Zen: Brain rules for Powerpoint & Keynote presenters

Must See Video:

Report Card 2.0: Instead of Grade, How About Certification

What is the purpose of giving a test? My initial reaction is that a test is to measure how much or how well a student has learned or mastered a specific learning standard or goal. I am sure you have you own definition and the literature probably has hundreds of reasons for students being given a test.

I stumbled across this post on the Will at Work Learning blog, which reviews the book Measuring Learning 8 by Sharon A.Shrock and William C. Coscarelli. The book discusses Criterion Referenced Test Development.

Shrock and Coscarelli put forward what they call the "Certification Suite." In criterion-referenced testing, the goal is to decide whether a test taker has met a criterion or not. When they have met the criterion, they are said to be "certified" as competent in the area on which they were tested. The Certification Suite has six levels, some which offer full Certification and some, which offer Quasi-Certification:

Certification

   1. Real World
   2. High-Fidelity Simulation
   3. Scenarios

Quasi-Certification

   1. Memorization
   2. Attendance
   3. Affiliation

I thought this could be an interesting way to measure student proficiency. If the student has demonstrated that they have completely mastered the subject matter and can apply it to real world situation, the will have achieved the Real World Certification. If the student can demonstrate competency of the subject matter in simulations closely matching the real world, they would receive the High-Fidelity Simulation Certification. If student demonstrate mastery of the subject matter in very controlled scenarios, then again, the student would receive the Scenario Certification.

Quasi-Certification would result if the student memorized the subject matter, i.e.; vocabulary, formulas, dates, etc, but can’t truly apply the information. These students would receive the Memorization Certification. If students were in attendance, trying, practicing, and participating, but still didn’t master the subject matter at a level that reached Memorization or higher, then they would receive the Attendance Certification. Finally, if student were simply in the room during the teaching of the subject matter, but did nothing more, than the might receive the Affiliation Certification.

These Certifications can be loosely correlated with the A-F grade scale or the 1-5 scale. In any case it is an interesting model that could provide an interesting way to approach grading or judging student mastery. It might provide a great way for students to check for their own understanding by providing a rubric for students to judge for themselves how well they are doing after a particular lesson.

Teachers, Your Personal Brand Management Is On The Line

After following the conversation over at The Thinking Stick and 2¢ Worth, it got me to thinking. The Internet and new information technologies have radically changed the ways and the speed with which information, data, perceptions, and opinions about you, your school, or your district can be spread. Today, you have a personal brand.

Today, parents and students share their thoughts about teachers mostly through word of mouth. But that is changing. Technology is changing it. The reputation of teachers, the perceptions or opinions of teachers, are becoming public shared via Web 2.0 technologies. Nowadays, there is no limit to how many people (students, parents, community members, and other teachers) can communicate via the Internet.

I imagine a conversation between a parent and principal in the near future might look like this…

Parent: “I would like my student in _________ class.”

Principal: “All of the teachers at _________ are excellent, why this teacher?”

Parent: “I looked at the teachers website and saw examples of past assignments and projects. I looked at the teacher’s latest test scores via the state department of education data/information website and like what I saw. I checked the district website and found the latest professional development the teacher just participated is suited for my students needs. I ran the teacher’s name through Google and Wikipedia and didn’t find anything that troubled me.

“Further, I checked the teacher’s Facebook site and ran their name through RateMyTeacher.com and was impressed with their reviews. I listened to several of the Podcasts created in the their class and viewed some of the digital projects created by students in their class. I appreciate their style and the type of learning going on. Finally, I asked for opinions about the teacher on a few community blogs and was impressed with some of the feedback I received. So based on this teacher’s public profile, I would like my student in their class.”

Principal: “Umm, wow! Can you go over that with me one more time?”

The availability of information and the increasing use of multiple communication technologies is going to create a day when and teacher is a “brand.”  The way the teacher teachers, the techniques used in the classroom, the types of assignments given, the use or non-use of technology, student test scores, professional development received, degrees or certificates earned, and opinions and perceptions from others posted to the Internet will create a profile of a teacher. That profile of the teacher is, for all intents and purposes, that teacher’s brand.

Teachers will have to manage their brand just as any other company would want to manage their personal brand. Their methods, their style, personality, strategies, use of technology, test scores, etc. will combine to make your personal brand. And believe me, your personal brand is going to be discussed, shared, and examined via the Internet. RateMyTeacher is just the beginning.

Digitization is going to allow student work and assignments to be put on the Internet, creating a digital portfolio or footprint that will follow you. It is not a stretch to imagine, that as state, county, or district data/information management will allow the public to see your students test scores, professional development hours, credentials and certificates, etc. all of which will allow the public to see more of your personal brand. Transparency is here!

Maybe you should get a new head shot. You want to look your best! Sanders Says, "If not, how can you build a personal brand? Your picture is more memorable than your bio. Maybe that’s what people mean when they say that “a picture is worth a thousand words.”

Catalytic Questions:

What do you think your personal brand is?

How will educators manage their personal brands?

How might we encourage schools and educators to begin thinking about managing their brands?

Will books and courses on marketing and brand management become essential tools and knowledge for educators?

What other types of data or information will be part of an educator’s personal brand?

 Ideas:
Jeff Utecht offers some advice:

1. High Schools especially should start by creating a group on Facebook that they can control the content      on. Then invite their students to join.

2. Search Often: Schools should run searches on all major search engines to know what people will find       when they are looking for your school.
   Using RSS feeds from sites such as Wikipedia allows a school to track changes on their school’s page.
   Know your audience: Signing up for a simple tracking program like Google Analytics and install it on        the school’s home page.
   Understand Students: Understand students today. Be connected to them, listen to them, where are they    at online? What are they talking about? Where should the school be?
    
Suggested Reading:

Jeff Utecht

David Warlick

Tim Sanders

Daniel Pink: A Whole New Mind Interview

From eSchool News...

" Author Daniel Pink discusses what it will take for students to succeed in an outsourced and automated world--and how schools should change their approach to education accordingly."

The Age of Relationships: What Will You Have To Learn? What Will You Have To Unlearn?

Nobody reads my blog. Well, that is not entirely true, but most never leave a comment. On his great blog The Thinking Stick, Jeff Utecht posted about why people don’t leave comments on the blogs they read (Where are the comments?)

I of course, left a comment.

Jeff, your previous post about participating in Web 2.0 and the accompanying diagram provide some meaningful ideas.

As Gary Hayes said, “… that participation in society, politics, online social networks etc: is not either on or off it is a continuum of degrees of influence.”

Many more people fall on the continuum of consumer as opposed to commenter.

Having not have grown up with the ability to comment instantly on what we read, view, or hear, we are simply not used to doing it. In school, we never got to comment on or share what other student wrote or created. We simply created and that was it. Hand your work in, the teacher will make comments, not you.

Maybe we are just selfish. A comment signifies you have more insight than I. Your ideas are somehow more worthy than mine. Why should I help you?

Maybe we are just lazy!

But this got me thinking about something I read in Peter Sheahan’s book Flip. Peter believes that we are leaving the age of the knowledge worker and entering the age of relationships.

So just as we are coming to grips with the fact that we live in a flat world and knowledge workers is the area the education should be focused on developing, we come to find that even the knowledge itself is a commodity that can be outsourced overseas. In it’s place it the ability to create and trust and build relationships that will be the competitive advantage and need we should begin preparing our students for.

Peter says, “Being a knowledge worker is not going to offer competitive advantage in and of itself…In the years ahead, two things will count the most. The first is your ability to unlearn the things that are losing relevance, to flip yourself free of old scripts, and to learn the things that are gaining relevance. The second is whether people come to know and trust you as they struggle to bring their own learning forwards. That is do you really care about and respect them?”

So I ask what things are our students learning today that they will have to unlearn to be successful in the flat world of tomorrow?

Also, what sorts of skills and experiences must we provide for our students so that they are able to build relationships?

What are the tools of the relationship era? Blogs, wikis, podcasts, Twitter, Skype, YouTube, Wikipedia, Google Earth, Flickr, Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, and many other Web 2.0 technologies are certainly all examples of tools of the relationship age. How many teachers or principals are “literate” in these tools and technologies?  How many of our students are? 

Are we asking the right questions? What is literacy in the relationship era? What does educated look like in the relationship era? What will our students need to be able to do?

Peter says, “If you are betting instead on a lifetime of learning and unlearning, and of leveraging relationships with valued customers and clients, you should be confident of your ability to make your way.”

So, coming back to Jeff’s post. Wouldn’t posting comments on blogs we love or find interesting be a useful skill in the relationship era?

But then again I could be wrong. How else could we are still banning cell phones, blogs, and YouTube from our schools. So where is the real job preparation happening. In the school from 8 to 3, or in the Web 2.0 technology rich lives of our students outside of the classroom.

Speaking of Web 2.0, take a look at this YouTube video.

Teacher Replaced By a Laptop And RSS Feeder

The time had finally arrived, today, we the made the tough decision to replace our teachers with laptops and RSS feeds. Sadly, the teachers understood that it had to happen.

Of course I am kidding, but imagine your students reading books you assign each day in their RSS readers or through email. There would be nothing for the district or school to buy, nothing to track, nothing to shelve, and nothing to take up space in a backpack. Just small portions of books selected by the teacher or student.

I did come across a new website that will deliver small portions of books to your email or your RSS feeder. DailyLit brings books right into your inbox in convenient small messages that take less than 5 minutes to read.

Here is a portion from 100 Ways to Succeed/Make Money by Tom Peters.

"Here's the Big Word I want us to obsess on in today's Tip: WE! (And: US!)

"Here, for example, is my re-write of the above script: "We often hear the following Objection blah blah blah. What if it weren't an objection at all? What if it provides us with an Opportunity to get our oar in about this blah blah blah [product benefit, say]..." Note, obviously, in my rewrite the three uses of "we" and "us." From long experience, I suggest that this changes the Fundamental Nature of Community-Interaction between the Instructor and the Student. Instead of being an imparter-of-knowledge to the Unwashed, I/trainer am now a fellow-toiler-in-the-trenches hunting for a fruitful solution to "our" shared dilemma. Right?

"Student and teacher are now--via Pronoun Power!--engaged in a Joint Venture toward Excellence. (Or some such.)”

Just another blow to the “walls” surrounding the “empire” that is the old model of education, which is slowly crumbling before our eyes due to forces outside of the walls.