Spring is Here(?): The New National Educational Technology Plan
I have been reading the new National Educational Technology Plan released (NETP) on March 5, 2010. The plan lays out such a revolutionary model of learning that I wonder if it has gone through the sanctions of the U.S. Department of Education or perhaps this signals a change in the directions of the Department, I wish.
The model of 21st century learning described in this plan calls for engaging and empowering learning experiences for all learners. The model asks that we focus what and how we teach to match what people need to know, how they learn, where and when they will learn, and who needs to learn. It brings state-of-the art technology into learning to enable, motivate, and inspire all students, regardless of background, languages, or disabilities, to achieve. It leverages the power of technology to provide personalized learning instead of a one-size- fits-all curriculum, pace of teaching, and instructional practices. (NETP, p. vi).
“Personalized learning instead of a one-size-fits-all curriculum, pace of teaching, and instructional practices.” What a vision! The group that worked for the plan must be congratulated for what they have done and the Department praised for releasing the report.
The Plan contains a list of goals and recommendations in five areas: learning, assessment, teaching, infrastructure, and productivity. In each of these goal statements, I have been able to find some key words that I like:
Learning: All learners will have engaging and empowering learning experiences both in and outside of school that prepare them to be active, creative, knowledgeable, and ethical participants in our globally networked society.
Keywords: all learners, engaging and empowering, in and outside school, active, creative, knowledgeable, ethical, and globally networked.
Assessment: Our education system at all levels will leverage the power of technology to measure what matters and use assessment data for continuous improvement.
Keywords: measure what matters and use data for improvement
Teaching: Professional educators will be supported individually and in teams by technology that connects them to data, content, resources, expertise, and learning experiences that enable and inspire more effective teaching for all learners.
Keywords: supported, enable and inspire
Infrastructure: All students and educators will have access to a comprehensive infrastructure for learning when and where they need it.
Keywords: all students and educators, comprehensive, and when and where they need it.
Productivity: Our education system at all levels will redesign processes and structures to take advantage of the power of technology to improve learning outcomes while making more efficient use of time, money, and staff.
Keywords: redesign processes and structures, making more efficient use of time, money, and staff.
These keywords project a different vision of education from what is reflected in the Administration’s Race to the Top initiative and certainly NCLB:
- Learners as individual human beings, learning takes place in different places and forms, learners must be engaged and empowered, and they will be participants of a globally connected society rather than test takers, standards bearers, or empty vessels waiting to be filled with bits of knowledge;
- Assessment should be done to improve learning and measure what really matters in life rather than labeling students, scare educators, and enforce government mandates;
- Teachers are professionals who need to be respected and supported, enabled and inspired rather than lazy, incompetent, and unethical workers who must be closely watched, constantly monitored, and baited with carrots or scared with clubs.
I hope the recommendations of this plan will be taken seriously by the Department. Moreover I hope the same philosophy will be driving the reauthorization of the ESEA (now under the name of NCLB).
What happens after the recommendation? Why do you hope that the department will accept the recommendations of the plan? Are they not created by the same department?
When I read the plan,I was also reading the Aeneid. I was interested in the ideas noted above, and then startled with the juxtaposition of Thymeotes encouraging that the “gift” left on the shore be pulled immediately into the city and “put into the citadel.” Maybe this is a gift, maybe not, but what are the other outcomes and effects of more nationalization? Are we doing enough up front collaborative reflection? Once national standards, and of course, when down the road the some national curriculum and national assessment suggestions from our DOE add to this picture, is there a way back if we so choose? Look around the world for some answers. Let’s be sure of what we really want to put in our citadel.
I am a “retired” agricultural lecturer from the UK,now living in the Basque country, Spain, and with 30 years experience.
I was responsible for the “day-release” (students attend once per week) of the British system of NVQ (national vocational qualifications) in my College.
I believe that that system is fine in theory, but flawed in practice. Students complain of too much paper-chasing.
For years, I had been saying that what they really need to be equipped for the 21st century agricultural industry is more of a system of “distance learning”, and perhaps gather together once a month or so for tutorials.
But to no avail. It seems that Britain will retain, for now, the NVQ system. It needs re-vitalaising.
What you are proposing sounds just the ticket!! Self-learning packages need skill in writing, but will deliver what trainees need better than the current system, which tries to mimick the full-time learning programme.
I wish you well in your proposals.
Hello there, I have been searching the internet for a couple of days now and I find your article very interesting so I thought I’d leave you a short note to say what a terrific resource I believe you have going here, carry on the good work. Visit Tech Edu here
Feel free to comment:
The views expressed on this site are entirely my own. They do not represent my employer or any other organization/institution. All comments are subject to approval.Archive
07.29.24 AI Has Little to Contribute to Traditional Education: Problems and Possibilities
03.17.24 Focused: Understanding, Negotiating, and Maximizing Your Influence as a School Leader
02.25.24 What Happened to Global Competence?
08.05.23 Rethinking the time spent at school: Could flexibility improve engagement and performance for students and teachers?
01.17.23 Introduction to Improbable Probabilities: The Unlikely Journey of Yong Zhao
01.05.23 How Not to Kill Creativity?
08.19.22 Preface to Improbable Probabilities: The Unlikely Journey of Yong Zhao
02.05.22 Introduction to New Book: Learning for Uncertainty: Teaching Students How to Thrive in a Rapidly Evolving World
09.25.21 Side effects in education: Taxonomy of educational outcomes
07.13.21 Introduction to My New Book: Learners without Borders
03.09.21 New article: Build back better: Avoid the learning loss trap
02.18.21 New article: The changes we need: Education post COVID-19
09.15.20 Watch Ep4 Creativity in Crisis: How well is creativity understood? A Conversation with Barb Kerr, Haiying Long, Ron Beghetto, & Yong Zhao
08.15.20 Can Creativity be Taught? Ep 3 of Creativity in Crisis on August 28th 3:00-4:00pm Pacific Time
07.13.20 Speak a Different Language: Reimagine the Grammar of Schooling
Tag Cloud
Accountability achievement gap CCSSO China/Chinese Commissioner Common Core Standards education Educational Policy Education Reforms national standards New York NGA Singapore standardized testing Standards student performance
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck and Luke Morton requires Flash Player 9 or better.
Silverliningforlearning
Most Commented
Most Viewed
Views expressed on this site are entirely personal. They do not necessarily represent the official positions or views of my employer
Powered by WordPress | Log in | Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS) | Arthemia theme by Michael Hutagalung