So this might totally fall flat on its face, but I’m wondering how all you out there who are deeply invested in social learning spaces might respond to this unlikely but hopefully compelling scenario:
Imagine for a moment that high schools as educational places vanish from the earth. How would you go about educating the 14-18 year olds in your lives? What resources, programs, strategies, assessments would you use? Or what would we need to create in order for them to become “educated” in the current sense? What would that world look like?
Could it even be done?
Can it be done? This is probably a very different answer in different communities. Could a “non high school” get it done in Newark or New Haven?
I read on the internet somewhere that people are already doing this. You might want to Google “homeschooling.”
Yeah…I knew that was coming.
Happy to get it out of the way early. 😉
How do you not love Tom’s comment here? I think the Internetz and the entire edu-blogoshere community might take a moment to pause in its glory.
First a question for you Will, why abandon the physical space entirely? I think there is value in a physical space blended with the digital spaces that are evolving. School buildings (I have recent post on this topic http://shift2future.blogspot.com/2010/01/schools-of-future.html) need to be reimagined for sure to support social, digital learning without the regimented timetable with flexible spaces, perhaps designed for project / problem / design based learning.
I guess I put it back to you first to clarify why you think physical school buildings / common learning spaces should be abandoned.
I think I’d re invent the high school. What a cool new beginning that would be.
Non compulsory
Set your own learning agenda
Make and publish stuff
Lots of art
Lots of science
Lots of thinking
Lots of stories
Lots of problems to solve
and sport
and travel
and multi national and multi ethnic
and post geographic
and free 🙂
I like this brainstorming!
Does this assume that the first 9 years of schooling beat the joy of learning out of them, or is there still some drive and or passion for learning for learning’s sake?
If they have been in “formal” training, I mean education for the last 9 years, I think you have a tough job ahead of you, and a lot of un-learning to do.
Obviously, the answer you are looking for, is that we would have them build these rich PLNs where they could pursue passion based learning, and create robust learning networks that could sustain life long learning. We would teach learning, and they would tap into the content and resources.
I disagree with the implication that schooling beats the joy of learning out of children. I am an educator and I have an eight year old, who attends school, and schooling hasn’t beat the joy out of learning for her. Neither for my six year old.
Sometimes as an educator I can become arrogant. I think that students who don’t like to learn have had the “joy of learning” beat out of them by school. Most of the students that I know who don’t like to learn have parents who don’t like to learn, and come from homes where learning new things is not a priority. It is not the fault of the hard working teachers who went before me.
And kudos to all you teachers who have inspired kids to learn who come from a situation where learning isn’t supported at home.
Brilliant comment Jason!
Maybe it’s parents who beat the joy out of learning out you, (me), or us. My dad certainly beat the s-, er, I mean, the joy for learning out of me! He knew the value of an education! He told me I’d better bring my grades up or he would make me wish I’d paid attention in the classrooms with his belt or his hand. I was afraid of him. But that didn’t make me an “A” student. I was average. I was a day-dreamer. I wanted more out the education than I was getting. I had a few teachers who were exceptional, though. Coach Neville taught me basketball. I wasn’t very good but he let me play in games that were important. He was great! I wasn’t but I knew that a teacher who gives everyone a chance, is a good teacher. Mr. Sparks was a skinny man who ruled with an iron fist- in the music dept. He taught band, vocal music- and he gave me an appreciation for the classics- Beethoven, Lizst, Schubert, and other great composers! But my dad- he wanted me to follow in his own footsteps and be a mail carrier. I wanted to be a poet and songwriter. I wanted to sing. But my dad beat that out of me. Physically and emotionally. I’m sure glad I don’t have kids. I love kids but I might’ve been a lousy father because my father was there but he wasn’t there.
Not saying they should. Just trying to see what kinds of ways people think about learning outside of school.
This is my latest dream…as it evolves – i visualize “public high school” as maybe 2 hours face to face per day.. http://tinyurl.com/ycf57p5 – what do you think?
Ouch. Let’s assume elementary school prepares them for no high school and is focused on maintaining a love of learning.
High School is Over! (if you want it).
It strikes me that perhaps we need to have students respond to this. I think they have already moved past our schools as we struggle! What do they think? That could be their assignment this year!
lol Tom! The problem with homeschooling is that it is still run by our government’s educational system, which has been taking a beating in the public eye as of late.
How about this- certificates that can be earned in various required areas, Math, Science, Technology Skills, etc.- similar to college degrees. These certificates can be earned by learning required skills in each area. Demonstration of learning should be a practical application of each skill, in a format chosen by the student. Skill courses would be available through private institutions, or students could possibly direct their own learning through the help of a PLN and/or independent research.
now, who shall oversee this learning? The government? I don’t think that is the best solution. How about a private educational organization run by certified teachers wh actually know what they are talking about, unlike the bureaucrats and red-tape set that are doing the job now?
I don’t mean to sound bitter, but this blog post illustrates the reason teachers need to have more say in educational policy.
so, that’s just a few thoughts. I have no idea if this would work, but it’s just an idea…
I’m not sure I want the College Board running this.
ugh, my link didn’t work… see here: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/teacher_of_the_year/2010/01/teachers_should_be_seen_and_no.html
This comment will likely not answer your question directly but rather serve to add fuel to this fire. I have been thinking about this lately as I have spent quite a bit of time over the past year following two YouTube channel’s that have a high level of viewership and have grown a community around their content. Many of the things these Channel producers do in their YouTube clips is similar to what teachers do. They engage their audience, challenge them to produce content, and respond accordingly. There is definitely learning occurring here though not accredited. If we were to get rid of high school, given the tools we have today, I suspect elements of pedagogy would have to be derived from the strategies these producers use to engage their audience. Somehow some form of accreditation and a way to track student progress toward a diploma would need to be applied to this social space. Perhaps this could be done with a tool like Facebook (maybe we call it Schoolbook). However, if we create this we run the risk of turning it into a “creepy treehouse.” It has to evolve naturally.
We have portfolio-based accreditation for teacher licenses in many states, why not portfolio-based accreditation for high school diplomas?
Ok, what channels are you watching, Carl?
Will, your premise reminds me of how Google Wave was developed.
Instead of asking, given everything we know now, how would you go about creating “e-mail”, we’re asking how would you create “high school.” If only we had resources equivalent to Google!
I like the hybrid approach. Unfortunately, I don’t think the infrastructure in this country is far enough along to allow for this everywhere. That’s where the stimulus $ should be going!! It would be good for learning AND good for business!
I am not sure that it is a matter of not having the appropriate resources. I think what Google has is employees focused on innovation, a lack of government regs and intervention, and ongoing critical evaluation of every aspect of the organization. We do see a different type of workspace, where creativity is nurtured, and hierarchy is minimized. Clearly we have a lot to gain by looking at successful corporations’ approach to employee engagement and ongoing improvement.
Hey Carl, Thanks for adding to this thread. Would love to get links to those YouTube spaces. I agree, again that the accredidation piece of this is tough. It would require huge shifts in attitudes, especially on the part of parents, who would have to be comfortable with their children creating bodies of work that stand up to and compete with others’ portfolios. But I just think that would be so cool to see. Tough for parents in general to navigate, but cool to see.
I would take them outside. (Yes it helps that we have a lot of acres but we do not have access to museums and the like.) There is a ton of practical science out there, and wonder and wondering. And Field trips. And writing. And learn history from what is going on now, questioning the past and the present alike…
Would they care? Probably more when they begged me in elementary school to home school them. Now they have been influenced.
I’m glad Louise brought this up, because this would be central to any plan I could buy into.
Computer labs, science labs, open space (lots of possibilities) indoor classrooms, and lots of open space outdoor classrooms. Partnerships with parks systems, farms, zoos, university laboratories, and companies related to the fields the students may consider entering as adults.
Project-based learning that requires lots of reasoning, problem solving, mathematical application, writing, public speaking, collaboration, and exploration. The more nature and outdoors involved, the better. In fact, the first generation of these un-schools could focus on providing more available natural space for future students. Reclaiming land, working with developers to create more livable housing that incorporates and works around natural beauty instead of destroying it, programs to help heal what we’ve been doing to the Earth with our tree-devouring paper mills we currently call most high schools.
And no standardized tests. EVER.
I so struggle with this too. My kids have the concept of “school” down. Learning? Notsomuch. The shift my wife and I would have to make would be huge. I admire those parents who find ways to do it.
My son is in kindergarten and really loves to learn. He’s teaching himself a ton of content outside school, and school is the place he learns his social skills. I worry, though, that a time may come where school becomes irrelevant for him. I am a teacher, and I teach at my son’s school. We only go up to 8th grade, and I think that what we do is fairly relevant and rewarding for our students. We also challenge the kids quite a bit. But I am concerned for many of our students in their high school experiences. The “way” right now to be an excellent student, in the eyes of the current system, is to overload with AP and Honors classes to fill out the perfect transcript. Does that really encourage learning or expertise in test taking and conforming to a system that in no way resembles the real career world a majority of students will live in as adults?
We had an idea for an on line learning experience to encompass and parallel school..we called it Mei 🙂 but decided it was too much like face book on steroids..still..some of it might be useful..
Does this count
‘Mei’ is a concept that combines game play, learning and social networking environments to connect users/players/learners’ formal and informal use of digital spaces. It will motivate players to utilise and showcase all of their skills both within digital spaces and in real spaces.
It will become a self regulating, peer reviewed network, which is game driven but incorporates the publishing aspects of an e portfolio and the communication and collaboration networks of sites such as myspace.
Target audience
Our target audience is a typical key stage 2 kid. Owns a PSP or DS, plays on PS2 , Wii or PS3, has a mobile phone and may be motivated by school or demotivated. They are the connected generation that can text faster than they can type or write. Typically, they want to show and tell their successes and their ability at school or what gets rewarded by school is just a small slice of their life. Assessed in school by passing tests and written work ‘Mei’ will offer users so much more by taking into account learners’ informal and out of school learning, skills and achievements. Mei will also go a step further by assessing the process of learning, collaboration and team work that make up the skills required for a modern economy and an holistic balanced life.
Policy, principles and pedagogy.
Mei will be based on five main overarching themes.
1. The every child matters agenda will both underpin and foreground activities within Mei.
• Be healthy
• Stay safe
• Enjoy and achieve
• Make a positive contribution
• Achieve economic well-being
2. The learning and collaborative elements of Mei and the ‘learning challenges’ inherent within it will be underpinned by using Guy Claxton’s learning power framework based on the concept of ‘learning how to learn’ and developing autonomous learners. Mei will use this as a way of developing and capturing the processes of becoming independent learners.
Resilience : Stickability and tenacity, enjoying challenge
Resourcefullness : Learning in different ways, knowing what to do when you don’t know what to do.
Reflection : Strategies and self awareness
Relationships : Learning alone and with others
This framework will be developed through reference to other taxonomies such as Anderson’s revision of Bloom and Marzano’s Thinking skills framework.
3. Game based learning strategies.
Game based learning is based on
Problem solving and challenge
Collaboration and community
Trial and error, intuition, getting informed and hard thinking
Building and developing characters and identity
Narrative and reflection
Purpose and perseverance
and grounded in social contructivism, motivational theory and problem based learning.
4. Personalisation.
The logic of education systems should be reversed so that it is the system that conforms to the learner, rather than the learner to the system. This is the essence of personalisation. It demands a system capable of offering bespoke support for each individual that recognises and builds upon their diverse strengths, interests, abilities and needs in order to foster engaged and independent learners able to reach their full potential. Future lab (2005)
Mei is about celebrating personal achievement and challenging and motivating individuals to take part in all aspects of life and learning. As such, it promotes personalisation as much as a digital life is personalised but also community, teamwork and collaboration.
5. Access
Mei will be available to all on multiple platforms including mobile and gaming platforms and will be web based.
How does it work?
Mei is based on building and maintaining a gaming character’s vital skills and attributes that are linked to the skills, interests, acomplishments and abilities of the user. The killer though is that those skills, interests and abilities will be verified by a variety of methods including, peer recognition and recognition of actual positive activity relating back to the various taxonomies of skills employed. Importantly, there will be an emphasis on process as well as product so that contributions that build learning power can be recognised.
The challenge is to keep your character alive and increase its spectrum of skills and abilities. This aspect of metacognition allows users to recognise both their shortcomings and skills as vested in their character’s identity.
Hey Karl,
Thanks for sharing these ideas. Very thought provoking. I think you capture a lot of what is wanting in schools right now especially in terms of resilience and resourcefulness. Seth Godin uses the sheep metaphor to describe school, and it resonates here. What you’re thinking promotes self-direction and adaptability, not herding.
So what ever happened to this concept?
The first thing is supervision of minors, assuming parents are working outside the home. Maybe the first 9 yrs can prepare 14/15 year-olds to be independent? If not, then one is still gathering up all the students and having them spend the better part of the American working day somewhere under the supervision of adults.
Hypothetically, the whole business could be privatized but we’d still need hefty govt subsidy for most families. If we make it non-compulsory and privatized then I imagine we’d get an increasingly economic divide in education: we’d move backwards. It’s the kind of problem we already see in higher ed as more people seek tertiary education.
So, short of reworking the entire American capitalist marketplace culture, I don’t see how one could move away from publicly-funded (and hence govt.-managed) institutionalized supervision of minors for the significant % of US kids. And while the kids are being supervised, there might as well be an educational activity to keep them busy.
On the other hand, I think it’s approx 8% of Americans who get undergrad degrees before age 22, which is fairly close to the % of Americans who go on to get graduate/professional degrees (which is not to say they are the same group, but I’d be there is a strong correlation). I’d also being willing to bet that that group trends toward wealthier, better-educated parents, b/c that’s how we do things ’round here.
I wouldn’t mistake it for “justice” or “democracy in action” but I imagine that one could create an effective, alternative education that was accessible for those kids.
Hey Alex…great to see you back here. Hope the new place is suiting you!
You raise a compelling question in terms of equal access, and that is my biggest concern about where all of this is headed. It’s economic, certainly; many kids are going to have choices in the next 10 years that many other kids won’t be able to take advantage of. But it’s also about making sure that all kids know about the choices out there in the first place. I’m thinking access in terms of how we are teaching kids to learn without school. Are we preparing them to learn without school? Are we purposefully teaching ourselves out of that traditional role?
This is a very interesting question and it is fun to read all the responses thus far. One of the things that is left out of the conversation is how the socialization of students would change. Most of what high schools do (or should do) is teach curriculum, but an important part (and a part that gets overlooked a lot) of high school is giving students the opportunity to grow up socially. That is, how to respond appropriately when challenges come up (when the cute girl turns you down for homecoming, or when your art drawing doesn’t win first prize, or when you don’t make the honors band, or basketball team, or you don’t get along with a teacher, etc.). If we eliminate the venue of those challenges, how will we teach our kids how to become more mature in handling those social pitfalls and hurdles?
I am unconvinced that the tired old argument that high schools teach students how to socialize holds any water. What aspects of our adult social lives parallel the kinds of social situations/dynamics found in high schools? The superficial social concerns that result from this artificial environment if anything create more scars than produce socially mature adults. The more I work in schools, the more I reflect on my own high school experience, and the more I engage with students in the online school I work at part-time the more I am convinced that current high school systems actually are harmful to student social development. School is not the only place where these skills are learned, school is the dominant place where social development scars are made.
That is more than a valid counter argument to what was posted. I am curious as to what your definition of a socially mature adult is, who defines it, and more importantly how do they get that way (you say that school is not the only place where these skills are learned)?
I’ll admit it, I am a public high school teacher who is striving to bring technology into his classroom and district so I do not have the same experience with online schools as you do, so I am wondering how the students in your online school become more socially mature? What avenues to they use?
My biggest concern is that we are getting away from face to face contact, and eliminating one venue for this to occur will only be harmful in the long-run. This is not said out of job protection, this is done out of a fear that we will raise a generation of people who can talk with anyone wonderfully in a chat room, but doesn’t know how to interact with people in a face-to-face setting.
It is easier to define what a a socially mature adult is not. The problem I am referring to here has to do with hang-ups caused by emotional scars. Teasing, social exclusion, pressure placed on students to “be popular” or hide aspects of their true selves out of fear of social isolation or peer disapproval produce insecurities that can plague a person throughout their whole life. I am sure we can think of a slew of other adult issues that stem back to problems caused in the social dynamic of f2f high schools.
As for my online students, the flexibility of online courses frees them to participate in more community and youth organizations. Many are actively involved in church groups, 4H, Scouts, interest groups, etc. Many of our students also meet with each other to form f2f study groups for their online schools. Many of our students also have jobs where they have plenty of opportunity to interact and socialize with other people.
I think the key difference between the social development of an online high school student and that of a f2f high school student is the ratio of social interaction they have between adults and other adolescents. The online student most likely has social interactions with adults far more than other teenagers while the social skills the f2f student learns are mostly from interaction with other socially, mentally, and developmentally immature peers.
As for job security, I don’t think that will be a problem any more than it already is. We will need teachers either way, be they online or f2f.
Thanks for filling me in on this Carl, having had little experience in online schools I really appreciate your insight.
I’d be curious to see if the elimination of high school as we know it happened whether or not the cyberbulling issues we have been seeing would disappear or shrink entirely.
As many have mentioned before, this is a discussion worth having with students and I look forward to doing exactly that when time allows here in the future.
I don’t think you can ever get cyber-bullying to entirely disappear. However, one thing I have noticed working simultaneously in both online and f2f schools is the online students tend to engage in that behavior far less. I suspect this is because what they do online is monitored by adults. When they are there we are there with them. In the f2f school too many of the places where students go online to interact with one another have policy-imposed walls between teacher and student. These online spaces are to many of our f2f high schools a virtual Lord of the Flies with little or no guidance from teachers, parents, or other responsible adults.
I have to say you’re right, there, Carl. Now that I am re-connecting with lots of people from high school (and K-8) on Facebook, it’s clear that we’re all “past” the high school artifice and drama and moved on (okay, so it’s 20 years later…) to parenting, careers, dealing with losing our parents, etc. We have more in common now, even spread out to all corners of the country as we are, than we ever did when we had the same colors and mascot and spent all our days under the same roof.
There are things about high school I wouldn’t trade, because it was the last chance to really enjoy myself and partake in all kinds of activities I would never have time for once adulthood kicked in, but I think we can replicate those opportunities through vital communities of common interest.
What has changed is when you left those people to move on with your life, to go to college, to get a job, or whatever you chose to do 10-20 years ago there was a very real separation. That separation was necessary to allow people to get past the “high school artifice an drama.” Today, our high school graduates are taking their friends with them. It is one thing joining Facebook at age 30, 40, 50, etc. and reconnecting with people you had not seen or heard from in many years, it is another to never be able to separate completely from your high school classmates and never be allowed that distance to shed adolescent baggage.
That’s a compelling observation, that they can “take their friends with them.” Wonder what changes that fact is going to bring about.
Hi have you read the stuff on networked publics by Dana Boyd
I have not…but am checking out her site right now! Thanks Karl!
Learning is intrinsic but often needs to be specifically taught.
Schooling should be the development of essential basic skills in order to facilitate life-long learning. We need to teach the process of learning as well as the content. We need to provide opportunities K-8 to experience PLN’s and the power of collaborative creation. We need to enable students to think and work with their strengths, interests, and challenges, and how to be willing to revise and edit their learning. Then 14-22 year olds could create learning plans that involve both face to face and virtual learning experiences.
I think college needs as much reform as K-12.
i like this…
We have portfolio-based accreditation for teacher licenses in many states, why not portfolio-based accreditation for high school diplomas.
But we’re saying no highschool – so no accreditation needed. right?
I believe the best way for kids (and teachers) to learn is through plns formed by passion. Because they are and can sustain individuality as opposed to one-size-fits-all.
But in my mind – would high school age need/want a face-to-face place to touch base for at least jump starting their plns?
I see no college.
Highschool – maybe 2 hours per day – facilitating/learning plns… then their pln becomes their college.
I know I have learned more in the last year – about how to learn from my plns than in my college ed.
I think that’s a huge question, that accreditation thing. Would the world still have some standards? Or would we just base people on what they can show that they can do with what they know? As in, you want to be a journalist, go be a journalist instead of go to school to be a journalist. (Or something like that.)
I don’t think we are saying “no accreditation needed.” Colleges and employers will likely still need some kind of certificate to show a student is qualified for ________ or ready to handle ____________.
I would argue that high school as a place for learning no longer exists for many (if not most) students. Students are forced to take classes 99% will have no real world application for. Teachers are not evolving either their teaching styles or their expectations. I know my two oldest daughters, one in college and one a sophomore in high school, have spent months of boredom in classes that neither meet their educational needs nor engage their thinking.
Most students that are succeeding do it despite the hours wasted in high school, not because of it.
I agree wholeheartedly.
We are also losing too many students in that 14-22 year old range who are not succeeding with the current model. It is imperative that we evolve the process of education.
Last night PBS aired a show called Human Spark – http://www.pbs.org/wnet/humanspark/- discussing what makes us as animals unique. One of pieces that connected back to education for me was a segment where the young children displayed an intrinsic desire to help (chimps did too up to a point). It made me think about the social element of teaching and learning. The intrinsic desire to help someone else by sharing what you know, what you can do, and what you just figured out is/could be a powerful motivator for a learner.
So back to your question, what if you combine the social element of learning and social responsibility to create projects for students to complete for the common good that would exempt you from high school. Imagine a group of students (50-100) working with several mentors/guides to improve the efficiency and services of a battered women’s shelter. The students have a year long commitment to the project and the guides are required to connect curricular goals to the real world problems facing the shelter. This project could encompass math, science, psychology, history, art, music, marketing, literature, etc. It would involve both online and in person tools and spaces. Students could work with both local, regional, and international experts. Student groups from different cities with similar projects could connect online. Assessment could range from project reviews, performance reviews, Mentor observations, participant journal, and even include more traditional assessments like a paper discussing the local economic factors that are increasing the shelter’s client base. After a year students would move to another project so over 4 years they would work with 4 different projects. Students would achieve curricular goals while gaining workplace type experience. Also, their motivation for learning might shift to being part of something bigger than themselves that would have actual tangible results beyond a diploma.
The idea needs more work but I think it is a possibility that would connect often disenfranchised teenagers into their communities and allow them to contribute in very powerful ways.
I love the idea of tying learning and social justice ideas together. We say that public education is needed to support democratic ideals, but we pay those ideals lip service, by and large. Very few kids are actually asked/taught to engage and make the world a better place.
Maybe then we would be free to blend the all effective forms of learning that have taken place over the last 300 years.
Examples:
-apprenticeships
-smaller leaning environments (via skype, etc…)
-Large learning environments (ustream, etc…)
-Collaborative learning, more writing through wikis, blogs, and other docs.
-True differntiated learning (student/family have more control of course of study.)
This would bring “Survival of the fittest” back alive in Education and hopefully bring with it more intrinsic motivation.
totally agree with the percentage of kids who think many if not most of their classes are a waste of time..
not only a waste of time… but they are not allowed to pursue their dreams (probably their future careers) until they get out of school.
hmmm. maybe next hour i’ll have my highschool math students join this conversation rather than practice rationalizing radical denominators… ?
good idea
less radical denominators would be a good thing 🙂
Would love to hear how they would go about educating themselves were there no high school. While at the end of the day I’m sure most of them could do it, I wonder how difficult a self-directed, roll your own currciulum might be for them to conceive. Ask them if they are overly dependent on the system when it comes to learning.
a former student – says she has fond memories of high school because she was in every club and sport. at times she’d miss class to finish projects – says – better use of time..- but still questions most of the projects.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZTvWFsAcNw
they are overly dependent on it and despise it at the same time. an abusive relationship for sure..
so in the 2 hours a day we unteach them that dependency as well.
sorry – i keep breaking your 0 hours rule. i’m not a good player.
Great discussion of a very realistic possibility. I understand there are many possible implications to how adolescents develop, but didn’t our society create this concept. In most societies, there was a Rite of Passage to becoming an adult. Does our society really have a Rite of Passage? I would argue that we don’t and it sure isn’t high school. As a result, it takes much longer for kids to become an “adult” than it did prior to school as we currently know it. Watch Failure to Launch, it is a perfect example of this. I think one could argue the educational system we have created has helped lead to the problem of there being no real rite of passage to adulthood.
What does this have to do with high school? Well I think we had good intentions, and the factory model was beneficial to our society 50 years ago, but today, the learning in high school as we know them could really happen with very little time if any time in a traditional high school building. Most of the learning could and eventually will take place in a digital, virtual world. It is inevitable.
I agree that kids need to learn how to socialize, but our current model doesn’t promote the type of socialization needed. We want global citizens correct? I think the time we spend during the day at school could be better spent doing community service projects, learning within a passion, or working. Yes I said working. Why would it be wrong to expect 15-18 year old kids to work? I don’t necessarily mean at McD’s or the 7-11, I mean in jobs in which they have to think, create, and collaborate. We have a whole segment of society that could positively contribute to our world, but instead we make them go to school and enable them to flounder along with little opportunity to discover what they want to do with their lives and often this leads to the rest of society paying for it. If we can develop a model that allows students to learn/work/intern within their passion, then there would be no need for high school. We could get teenagers a job within that passion and they would become life long learners committed to being a key contributor to a global society.
So in short Will yes, we can do without high school.
Thanks for those thoughts Deron. Your post on the has me thinking a lot about different models for the way we think about the profession. I do think that the way we think about local and global is shifting…here’s hoping I’m around to see how it plays out.
i’ll flip video your answer will… would you rather skype in and talk to them yourself?…
Did you “flip it”???? Hoping so.
nice Deron…
If we can develop a model that allows students to learn/work/intern within their passion, then there would be no need for high school.
Wow! Lots of comments and ideas here! I’d be tired if I read them all in one sitting.
My thoughts – (ideally of course)
-Have my kid think about and have a conversation with others about their passions.
-Help them narrow, clarify and identify where they’d like to be at 21.
-Backfill their life experiences list of to do’s based on that goal.
-Guide them in creating that task list.
-Work with them to schedule appropriate events according to their timeline.
-Review and adjust periodically as life happens, things change and reality hits.
-Provide lots and lots of travel experiences or virtual travel experiences
-Provide lots and lots of in person contact with those folks involved currently in the career area that interests my student.
-Provide opportunities to intern, shadow, excetera
-If college is still around, research requirements and provision for that
-Empower my student to be involved in learning in college while still high school age virtually or face-to-face.
Those are just a few of my thoughts – I am sure there are many that I did not think of in this short period of time.
I was having a conversation with my assistant principal just today about this topic. We have an online alternative school where students can earn credit. We both have students in Jr. High and feel our kids are capable of doing the work and earning quite a bit of high school credit. I walk in classrooms and see teachers teaching things that have no relevance outside of the school. Students don’t want to do things just because they are told they have too. Many of them have become too sophisticated/educated to see any value of “jumping through the hoops.” So many students are learning as well as developing skills without coming to school, that when they do, they experience many things that are simply irrelevant. For many of our students, high school is irrelevant. My worry is for those young people that do not have active learning modeled in their home. School is the only place that happens for some.
I like the idea of asking our current high school students this question. Do they actually learn things that are more relevant to them in school or out of school?
Isn’t the bottom line here that we learn best when we are highly motivated by the fact that we have choices to study things that are relevant and add value to our lives. Unfortunately, this doesn’t sound like modern American high schools.
The students that walk in our doors (at the high school I work in) every day are extremely compliant kids who do most everything we ask. By I am concerned that if we are getting more compliance than engagement than we are failing miserably.
I think in most cases students would survive quite well. I think that for my kids to continue being educated, I would have them develop a Personal Learning Network and oversee their search for “teachers” in areas that choose to pursue.
I think the question of ensuring that our students get “credentials” to move onto the next level is important. But I think the next question might be a rephrasing of the same one and replace the words high school with the word college.
The clear, sad truth is that in many (most?) cases students would be able to get a much richer experience without ever entering the doors of their local high school. How are we going to solve this problem?
I have found that using a LMS (Blackboard and eCollege) to teach 100% online has been a helpful infrastructure because:
1. It is user friendly. Any teacher who can use a word processing program can learn to use Blackboard or eCollege and could take their learner-centered, critical thinking, social, project-based, authentic curriculum online, making it more globally connected and vital. There is simply not much of a learning curve for using these platforms.
2. The platform provides both a private secure virtual classroom space with lots of opportunity for social interaction, as well as connection to the outside digital world. You can integrate the use of blogs, wikis, social bookmarking, mobile devices, etc. with the platform.
4. It provides all the logistical functions necessary to teaching, for example the gradebook allows me to gather all the forum posts for one student, re-read them and enter the student’s grade into the gradebook, all with one click.
5. The same platform also provides connection with the other faculty in the institution for the purposes of administrative business, professional development, and teacher collaboration, etc.
If existing high schools had flexible LMS, and each teacher had his own user-friendly virtual classroom space, wouldn’t it help in creating a continuum of ground, blended, and fully online alternatives for all kids?
Thanks for chiming in Denise. I have to ask, what’s different about the learning? Sure, the delivery changes, but are we letting kids be self-directed, steeped in inquiry, creating their own curriculum?
Will & all
Some interesting points, everyone has a take, everyone is ‘an expert’ of a kind on education. Ever wondered why?
If we presume we are constituted, built of what we ‘know’, then we don’t only KNOW a lot about school, we ARE school. School (homeschooling included to a large extent) is not (just) an institution, it is a particular way of thinking and knowing we are attached to. And because we can’t imagine anything different, we get cornered into dead-ends of ’solutions’ that substantially change – very little.
‘Getting rid of school’ is getting rid of a particular historically situated way of being (unhelpful and crusted and inadequate as it may be in many cases but very helpful in many others – hey, I don’t think those who benefited most from say ‘elite education’ would want to tear it down? ). In other words, it’s not just about thinking and learning.
For now, I don’t think we even have the language for it. But asking the question and imagining is good, first step yes. Or as the saying goes, logic will take you from A to B, imagination will take you anywhere.
A developing in-depth explanation of what I mean at http://tomazlasic.net/why-is-everyone-an-expert-on-education/
Regards
I would feel more comfortable removing colleges. I have just removed myself from a Masters Program because I was finding more value and learning more through the “informal” learning that takes place in my PLN. However, I couldn’t imagine being able to do this without formal learning early in my academic career. I think I have more to unlearn here…
Interesting question as I have just (yesterday) withdrawn my daughter from the brick and mortar school down the street so she can attend a 100% online charter. We have agonized over this decision, but recently realized that her deepest and most authentic learning is done outside of school (echoing Patrick Larkin’s comment).
It was amazing to sit through a GIEP meeting with all her teachers who couldn’t understand why a student with straight A’s in a full honors load felt she wasn’t learning or benefiting from attending their traditional high school.
My daughter’s goal for cyber school is to compact her studies (it’s a mastery learning model; kids move at their own pace) permitting her uninterrupted stretches of time to study topics of her own choice. Right now her interests are in the music and art areas, but she also regularly conducts her own science experiments.
With two educators for parents, you can be sure that this educational leap (both thrilling and terrifying) will be closely scrutinized. We’re hopeful for two things: it’s the right decision for our child and that we can contribute to the understanding that school doesn’t have to look the same for all kids.
Good on you, Stefani. What scares me most about this is that I’m not sure my kids would know what they want to study. I’m sure they’d find it eventually, but I think they would struggle with the independent learning at the start. Learning how to do that, however, might be the most important learning of all. Would love to hear how your experiences play out.
That struggle is exactly what I’m worried about … and looking forward to. I think the struggle IS the learning for many kids (I wouldn’t presume it’s right for all).
I’ve specifically chosen 21st Century Cyber Charter because it has a great track record of fostering an environment that suits independent “differently thinking” kids … but provides the structure to help them through the traditional requirements of high school.
I’ll also be honest enough to admit that I’m willing to take this risk for 2nd semester of 9th grade, just in case it turns out that it’s NOT right Cory – and then we can figure out the next step.
I’ll certainly be blogging as we embark on this adventure 🙂
I am wondering about college. I’m curious about doctors, lawyers, engineers, and the like. I appreciate the idea of removing the dull, irrelevant, and wasted time that so many endure during high school and that some tolerate in college. Yet, I feel that I learned a great deal in my [liberal arts college] undergraduate experience. And I worry about the quality of our professionals in our society if they have no formal education. Would you trust a doctor who never went to med school but swears he or she has a strong PLN backing him or her? I would not. [Ironically, I would trust a teacher who said they never went to teacher school but have strong PLN – I will have to reflect on that some time.]
I’m also concerned about safety. We live in a two income society and I would hate to think of the trouble young people might find themselves in with such limited supervision. Couldn’t we restructure so that school is fundamentally changed but still exists? Why get rid of *everything* just because it’s a flawed system? There are some good things about high school. I like that students are exposed to multiple subjects that they might not have chosen on their own. I like that they have extra curricular activities that they can pursue. I like that they meet a relatively diverse group of peers and learn a little bit about how the world works. And whether we like it or not, there are elements of the current school systems that help prepare students for the workforce – a necessity since they will likely spend a good deal of their lives working.
With that said, I think students are not given enough choice. Not even close. Just because they all need science doesn’t mean they all need the same class with the same focus. I also believe (here in suburban/rural MO) that I see a lot of need for stronger vo-tech programs. Many of the students who prefer to work with their hands are really benefitting from the option of beginning such programs BEFORE they finish high school, which inevitably helps with drop out rates.
I also like the idea of themed school options. Somewhat like charter schools, only on a large [totally free] scale. Thanks for giving me something to think about!
Online education can only go so far, we will still need the conventional educational institutes. Online education can act as a helping hand.
I agree with much of Jason Stein’s comment and can see the same with my own 9-year old. My 11-year old however is starting to lose that “joy of learning.” One example of why is that in computers he is being quizzed on vocabulary words like floppy disk and CRT.
However in the interest of not digressing, I think the important thing is that we look in the mirror and stop making excuses and getting defensive. We spend way too much time trying to justify things that are just unjustifiable.
Schools need to change big time. This is not a teacher thing, it is the structure within which teachers are asked to do their jobs that is the problem. Just continuing to do things the way we have done them for ??? years because we can’t think of a better way is insanity.
There are better ways and the saddest part is that keeping kids out of schools in many instances is better. Hopefully, we can put our energy into coming up with better options. From reading the great comments here, many are already doing this. Unfortunately, it is an overwhelming minority of our schools.
Reading through, I agree with the sentiment that portfolio-based learning would have to be the standard of an online-based high school, and would be an ideal way to teach. While I think we should be incorporating more networking into the classroom, I still think that we should be having students in traditional classroom settings. As we read this, how many of us are in teh careers we thought we wanted at 14. I sit here, a high school social studies teacher, who was convinced at age 14 that I’d be a brain surgeon. Had I not been exposed to the social sciences to the level I was in a traditional setting, I wouldn’t be in the career I’m in now (and as happy as I am). Surely we must be able to find the balance. . .
I also think we overlook the sense of “community” that is the essential basis of a school within a democratic society. A high school is certainly a unique social environment too, where yes, we may continue to practice “outdated” forms instuctional delivery & access… However, some kids even in “good communities” have no other supportive intellectual or emotional “home”? Sad? Yes…true, the answer is also yes. That is why I believe we must continue to have a physical place called “school” where peers can learn from each other as well as from caring educators engaged in real-live human-human forms of communication! I also believe there is way too much emphasis on the “individual” as it pertains to standardized test scores as the only viable evaluative tool to effectively measure learning. (Please see the misguided “Race to the Top” legislation!) Shouldn’t our students have to also learn to deal with their peers & social structure of the community outside of a computer screen with an internet connection?
I cannot agree more with Steven Barber, “community” is mandatory part of education. Some families send their children overseas for tertiary education not because it isn’t already available where they live but to let their children be expose to other cultures and people.
This may be of interest to some of you. Its a UK based organisation that has been doing something similar for students who can’t or won’t attend school.
http://www.interhigh.net/interhigh_prospectus.asp
Stephen Heppell who blogs at heppell.net has talked about this extensively.
I genuinely believe that this approach will work for many, many students who struggle with the auditory approach to learning so common in schools over the past hundred and fifty years.
Personally, I think that you need more than just a screen, so how about field trips say 4-6 times a year to do immersive learning in; space science, survival skills, charitable work.
I hope this helps
@bartoneducation
Will, Your post reminded me of a tangent I explored last year as I looked at possibilities for my children when they get older (high school age). I found the Unschooling and Worldschooling culture. Very intriguing and certainly made me think that a formal high school option could be vetoed. Here are a few links that I just dug up.
http://northeastunschoolingconference.com/Whatsitlike.html
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?v=wall&gid=4778233706
http://eligerzon.com/worldschooling.php
I was thinking that maybe 7th grade would be a great last formal year with a year transition into the Unschooling world with some structure to retrain and then off to learn. See a mix of field trips, adventures and virtual experiences.
Great post and comments!!! I wondered about your initial frame of “in order for them to become “educated†in the current sense”. It seems to me that one of the chronic educational issues is wrapped in those words. Do we have a shared understanding of “being educated”? Is “being educated” in the current sense different than in 1990? Will be in 2020?
“You go to school to learn to be stupid.” (John Holt, 1963)
Hey Folks, I am new to this discourse community, this tribe, and am really loving it. And coming from where I come, it is TOTALLY FASCINATING how the ideas that are resonating here, about the nature of “real” education, choice in learning and what propels deep engagement, and the punishments and toxicities of the institution, parallel very directly the so called “alternative school” movement in this country. Beginning with the radical school critics of the 1960s (John Holt, Ivan Illich), who felt that the institution couldn’t be reformed, there are little bands of outliers who have been pursuing free school and democratic school models for decades. But they’re not on Netvibes, EduCon, Bloglines, or even the Huff Post. They are very invisible politically (something I get on them about–link to upcoming piece about that.)
How might we get these tribes together? There is much mutual learning that might occur…