Possibly the most recurring theme that makes the rounds of the edbloggosphere is why the nation, states, school districts, schools and teachers have not been more open to change. Change in how schools do school, embrace technology and project-based, problem-based learning among other possibilities. Is it because things are going so well?
Doug over at Borderland picked up on a post by Clarence Fisher about a â€œgridâ€ that would apply to classroom change. I threw in my response and Doug replied, but the gem is Marco Poloâ€™s reply. I think he frames the issue magnificently:
a) you have to get agreement or consensus from so many different people, and b) so many of those people never meet or talk to each other.
The changes suggested may make perfect pedagogic and psychological sense, but be rejected because parents, teachers and other stakeholders are concerned that the changes may make the school appear â€œwackyâ€, and therefore seriously impact the employment chances of students who attend.
I know business people that feel things need to change – as well as some parents, administrators, teachers and obviously the edtech â€œgurusâ€ who are also spreading that notion ad naseum, – but when does that diverse group ever get together and hash this out? We should probably add some enlightened politicos (is that an oxymoron?) in the mix too. Did I leave an important group out? Students â€“ DUH! Anyone else?
So we’re talking about an Education Summit Meeting for Change! Any ideas? How do we pull this off? I might even talk my wife into letting me pay my way to something like this!
OK â€“ so whoâ€™s going to organize and invite and make this happen? I would … but … umm … my plate is full this summer. But Iâ€™ll be there, promise! (Was that too obvious a dodge?)
Learning, AND CHANGE, are messy! Too messy?