Friday, July 31, 2009

What a Pakistani village chief has to Teach Higher Education

I recently read Three Cups of Tea, by Greg Moretenson & David Oliver Relin.  In Chapter 12 of the book ("Haji Ali's Lesson").  The authors share an experience that Mortenson had with a Pakistani man named Haji Ali.  In a nutshell Mortenson learned an important lesson from that encounter--namely, that building relationships is critical for any individual or organization that wants to do work that makes a difference.  

That seems somewhat paradoxical in the age of tweets, power lunches, and other "efficient" or "time-saving" practices.  But, those of us in education--a business that claims to be about improving people's lives through learning--should take notice and consider the way in which we do things.  If your campus is like mine, you have probably seen a lot of "innovations" in the last few years that seem very forward and progressive, but that beneath the bells and whistles actually hurt relationships.  

Here are a few examples from my own experience:
  • No more admissions letters.  On my campus we have decided to save time and money by discontinuing the practice of sending letters to students informing them that they have been admitted to our university.  Rather, they are instructed to visit their application page and to check their "application status."  A status of "admitted" is meant to replace the letter most of us remember receiving.
  • Online "One-Stop" student services.  In the past our institution staged a "one-stop" shop during the first two weeks of each semester.  This was a place where many of the useful campus resources (tuition payments, parking services, registration, etc.) were centrally located and available to students from 8 - 5.  This allowed students to visit a single "shop" to run their pre-semester errands.  We have now discontinued this practice and have moved everything online.
  • Electronic Advisement Tools.  Within the last year we have launched a "MYMAP" registration and course planning system that allows students to create four year educational plans in an electronic medium.  The system helps students "organize" the list of courses they plan to take, "plan" which specific semesters they plan to enroll in those courses, and then "register" for courses during the appropriate semester.  

The list could be longer and I'm sure you could add to it.  At this point let me say that none of these things are inherently bad.  The university will save money by not mailing admissions letters, money that could be used to improve instruction.  Allowing students to purchase parking passes online before they arrive saves them from the headache of waiting in a line during the first week of classes.  Technology can definitely improve education and we have plenty of examples of that.  But, this also seems like a slippery slope that has the potential to move us away from some of the personal interactions, conversations, and relationships that I believe are critical to good educational practice.

In our efforts to be quick, seamless, and efficient, we sometimes eliminate opportunities for meaningful relationships to form.  There is power, for example, in a new student having a face-to-face conversation with a caring financial aid counselor who takes the time to help the student explore their options and find a financial aid package that best suits their needs.  The student leaves knowing that their are people on campus that care about their success.  That sort of experience, early in a students time on campus, can help shape their perspective of the institution and motivate them to excel.  An online financial aid selection tool might be faster, but something is lost when we eliminate the need for personal conversations.  In terms of advisement, some students may be able to navigate their experience using an electronic tool and even craft a very good educational plan.  But, an academic advisor, trained to engage students' in reflective conversations can do much to help students articulate their goals, dreams, and aspiratioins.  The vision that emerges in these conversations would seem to pay dividends in terms of student movitation, engagement, and persistence.

So, while relationships take an investment of time, effort and, often, monetary resources.  Those investments seem necessary to make if we want our educational enterprise to lead to the personal development of students.  It also positions those of us who interact (or should interact) with students--faculty members, student affairs professionals, admissions staff, etc.--to learn and develop through those interactions.  

Let's not get to antsy to innovate and streamline things.  It could come back to bite us.  Building relationships is just as important as building websites, curricula, or campus infrastructure.

Friday, July 17, 2009

Customized Learning & Civic Purposes of Education

After my last post (What would a Talent Code school look like?), my friend Gary Daynes raised an interesting question that I had not yet considered:

"How do the civic purposes of education fit in this model, which is so focused on differentiation and students moving at an individual pace?"

This is an important question to address because, like Gary has pointed out, a school like the one I described in my post has the potential to become a place where we see fragmented, isolated learning--not exactly the type of school I argued for.  In this scenario students would become self-absorbed learners with no real concern for using their education to make a difference in their community.

But, think that a combination of two things could keep this from happening.

1.  Humble learners:  Humility--characterized by a recognition that one's knowledge, perspective, and experiences are limited--would seem to draw a student to other learners in an attempt to glean from their studies and experiences.  Even if a student is pursuing their own learning, this element of humility would seem to engender a curiosity and desire to see how their learning fits with the others in their learning community or classroom.  How does what my classmate is studying connect to my learning?  What might I learn from her that could advance the learning I am doing in my realm?

In a related way, humility would also seem to lead to a gratitude for the learning one has acquired.  When a learner is grateful they seem to want to share their learning and use it to improve the people and things around them.  A humble learner would then look for opportunities to apply their learning towards grappling with authentic questions and problems in their environment.  For example, A high school soccer player studying human anatomy and basic principles of sports medicine might seek out opportunities to help teammates experiencing injuries.  

Teachers and schools should explore ways of helping students to develop this attitude of humility in their approach to learning.  At first glance it seems inefficient and disconnected from their purposes.  But, it could pay big dividends in terms of the way learners interact with each other and their communities.

2.  Teachers who know how to integrate students' learning in meaningful ways.  Gary's question has helped me realize that good schools don't just allow learners to pursue individual learning goals.  At some point, in the process they also bring learners back together and engage them in meaningful collaborative work.  In my mind's eye I see students invidividual learning equipping them to serve as "expert stakeholders" or "consultants" on group projects that require each group member to bring their learning and apply it towards developing a solution to a real problem that has been presented by the instructor.  In this way students personal learning goals are honored and validated, but they are also shown how their individual learning can be joined with others to produce powerful results.  In these classrooms an instructor's role is to, first, help students pursue their own learning and, then, to craft and identify problems/tasks/projects that bring groups of students together in a democratic way.

In short, while differentiated and self-paced learning might appear to run counter to the civic purposes of learning, if facilitated in the right way it may have the potential to be even more powerful than the type of civic and democratic learning we see in more traditional classrooms.

Friday, July 10, 2009

What would a Talent Code school look like?

One of the best books you've never heard of is probably The Talent Code by Daniel Coyle.  He writes about how to "grow" talent and what conditions lead to the development of skill.  I think his book has some interesting implications for the way that we design and administer schools.  Here is what a school might look like if Coyle designed it.

1.  An emphasis on deep learning through authentic practice & feedback--The best kinds of learning and growth occur when learners are in the "sweet spot", that zone where the learning task is just beyond their current abilities.  In this place a learner can attend to mistakes (which Coyle identifies as critical to improvement) and become fully absorbed in learning.  It is learning through these mistakes that a student experiences the greatest amount of growth (think about the student who takes seriously her teachers red-inked comments on the first draft of her essay).  In a Talent Code school, we would find classrooms full of students working on a variety of learning tasks, each suited to the learners needs and abilities.  Gone would be the days of 30 students working on an identical set of worksheets or the same set of math problems.  This, of course, implies the need for smaller class sizes, increased adult guidance, and teachers trained to quickly identify learner needs and respond with appropriately designed learning activities.  

This also means a paradigm shift in the way teachers and students approach learning.  If mistakes make me better, I must embrace struggle.  Far too often teachers and those they teach see mistakes and slip-ups as a sign of stupidity or inability.  A Talent Code school will help students develop a growth mindset, wherein struggle, effort, and hard work are valued and seen as the path to eventual competence and excellence.  In this school, the "smart" kids are the ones who learn from their mistakes, not the ones who never make mistakes.

2.  A focus on "igniting" a passion for learning--As described above, a Talent Code school asks a lot of its students.  There is a great deal of hard work and high levels of commitment required in order to experience the kind of success expected of students.  If students are not passionate about what they are doing, they will never engage in the deep practice and hard work necessary to experience significant growth.  Thus, teachers and administrators at a Talent Code school will spend a great deal of time thinking about how to ignite this passion in learners.  This will probably look different at each school, but some general principles apply

a.  A desire to belong:  KIPP schools (see Chapter 7 of Talent Code) have a very

 concrete and explicit culture; they clearly communicate to students that being a "KIPPster" means doing certain things.  It becomes a learning club of sorts, a club that students long to feel a part of.  This desire for belonging can be tremendously motivating (I think we see this same principle at work in a destructive way among gangs and terrorist groups).

 b.  A vision of what one can become:  When a young student can see what they are working towards (for KIPP students this is enrollment in college) they also see how their efforts are connected to a future goal.  A Talent Code school will use images and language that help to create this picture for its learners.  Keeping alumni connected to the school and inviting them to return to interact with students seems critical here.  When a student sees someone that was once "like them" and became something great, they start to see and believe in what they can become (see Coyle's discussion of the Curacaoan little league teams for an example of this principle at work; Chapter 6). 

 c.  Connection to personal interests and goals:  A Talent Code school will provide students with choice in what and how they learn.  This will be messy, but it is allowed because it leads to better learning.

  

3.  Master Coaches & Teachers:  Talent Code schools will aggressively pursue the best teaching talent available and then continue to develop and evaluate it.  Teachers in Talent Code schools (Coyle might call them "Talent Whisperers"--Chapter 8) listen and watch far more than they talk or lecture (in fact, they might never lecture) and then offer small, targeted, highly specific adjustments and feedback to learners.  They deliver information precisely at the moment that learners need it most and they model effective learning, leaving an image in memory of what good learning or performance looks like.  More than anything, they see and help learners correct errors and they do it in a way that signals to the learner that they are cared for and valued.  Not only are they pedagogical masters, they also possess a deep matrix of understanding within their discipline which allows them to make quick and accurate judgments (similar to the ability described by Malcolm Gladwell in Blink) about students abilities and needs, and then respond in a customized way.  I think that Michelle Rhee, chancellor of Washington DC Public Schools is doing some interesting things along these lines. 


Why would anyone take the effort to create schools like this?  Because they would work.  Students would learn, parents would be engaged in the school community, teachers would value their work and persist at it, and communities would be transformed.  Granted, what I have described here is an ideal; however, working towards ideals is what leads to change.