Comments on: New Bill to Support 21st Century Skills http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/?p=1754 Teaching & Learning in the new information landscape... Wed, 08 Sep 2010 22:41:46 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: James http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/?p=1754&cpage=1#comment-494665 James Thu, 21 May 2009 00:46:12 +0000 http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/?p=1754#comment-494665 The difficulty with the P21 movement is that it seeks to incentivize schools to focus on these process skills to the detriment of the foundation you agree is essential. If we were doing a great job making sure that our elementary students (like those in most other industrialized countries) have *mastered* reading, writing, mathematics, science, geography and history, it would be a no-brainer to build on that foundation with training in research, critical thinking, etc. in middle and high school. As it stands, our elementary curriculum (which really means tens of thousands of curricula, since every teacher essentially creates one anew) is uneven and eclectic, and doesn't do a good job of laying the foundation. As a result, kids that get the foundation get it at home, through tutors, academic summer camps, etc., and those without the parents or the means to do so end up with very shaky foundations, indeed. Kids who haven't been able to shore up their foundations need remedial help in these basic skills in middle school and often through high school. Given that there seems to be nothing that high school teachers enjoy more than project-based exercises that build and flex critical thinking skills, innovation, etc. (and why wouldn't they? it's fun to teach that way), it's unclear to me why we need an economic incentive for them to do more of it. Is there any evidence that teachers aren't currently teaching these skills, which might justify such a huge expenditure? Without that evidence, P21 comes off as a solution in search of a problem. The recent NAEP data suggest there are far bigger problems with high schools than a lack of innovation training and critical thinking work -- problems that probably prevent such critical thinking projects from being as effective as they could with adequate foundations. Thought experiment: imagine having one of the set-piece "debates" in social studies class -- over, say, censorship -- and being able to assume that nearly all of the students in your class came in knowing basic facts about both (1) the history of and justifications for free speech in our country and (2) the way other countries around the world currently handle it. Can you imagine how much more meaningful to those kids the debate would be than for students whose only exposure to those ideas came from the same teacher, in the week or so before the debate? The difficulty with the P21 movement is that it seeks to incentivize schools to focus on these process skills to the detriment of the foundation you agree is essential. If we were doing a great job making sure that our elementary students (like those in most other industrialized countries) have *mastered* reading, writing, mathematics, science, geography and history, it would be a no-brainer to build on that foundation with training in research, critical thinking, etc. in middle and high school. As it stands, our elementary curriculum (which really means tens of thousands of curricula, since every teacher essentially creates one anew) is uneven and eclectic, and doesn’t do a good job of laying the foundation. As a result, kids that get the foundation get it at home, through tutors, academic summer camps, etc., and those without the parents or the means to do so end up with very shaky foundations, indeed. Kids who haven’t been able to shore up their foundations need remedial help in these basic skills in middle school and often through high school.

Given that there seems to be nothing that high school teachers enjoy more than project-based exercises that build and flex critical thinking skills, innovation, etc. (and why wouldn’t they? it’s fun to teach that way), it’s unclear to me why we need an economic incentive for them to do more of it. Is there any evidence that teachers aren’t currently teaching these skills, which might justify such a huge expenditure? Without that evidence, P21 comes off as a solution in search of a problem.

The recent NAEP data suggest there are far bigger problems with high schools than a lack of innovation training and critical thinking work — problems that probably prevent such critical thinking projects from being as effective as they could with adequate foundations. Thought experiment: imagine having one of the set-piece “debates” in social studies class — over, say, censorship — and being able to assume that nearly all of the students in your class came in knowing basic facts about both (1) the history of and justifications for free speech in our country and (2) the way other countries around the world currently handle it. Can you imagine how much more meaningful to those kids the debate would be than for students whose only exposure to those ideas came from the same teacher, in the week or so before the debate?

]]> By: Peter http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/?p=1754&cpage=1#comment-494420 Peter Wed, 20 May 2009 03:56:58 +0000 http://davidwarlick.com/2cents/?p=1754#comment-494420 "<i>21st century skills such as creativity, innovation, critical thinking </i>(...)" Well, now that it's the <i>21st</i>-century I agree. But if this was still the 20th-century or earlier...or perhaps later, then promoting such skills would be misguided. Those era-based adjectives are so insightful and enlightening. If we added some version-based syntax then maybe we'd really generate some positive change in education. How about, "The 21st Century School 2.0 Skill Incentive Act". Feel it. “21st century skills such as creativity, innovation, critical thinking (…)”

Well, now that it’s the 21st-century I agree. But if this was still the 20th-century or earlier…or perhaps later, then promoting such skills would be misguided.

Those era-based adjectives are so insightful and enlightening. If we added some version-based syntax then maybe we’d really generate some positive change in education. How about, “The 21st Century School 2.0 Skill Incentive Act”.

Feel it.

]]>