“Mark Zuckerberg’s investment in personalized learning can only help” fuel the approach, said Eric Schneider, assistant superintendent of instruction for the Minnetonka, Minn., school district during a panel discussion on that topic. “It should bring more products to the market, faster. It’s an investment that’s going to trigger great thinking.”
Tell me again, why does someone have to make “an investment” in making learning more personal for kids? Could it be because “personalized” learning, once again, is something we do to kids, not something kids do for themselves? Something not “personal” at all?
Corporations want “personalized learning” so they can, wait for it…make money off of the interaction. End. Of. Story.
The dirty little secret for the Valley, and apparently for many in charge of educating kids, is that engaging children by giving them the agency to learn the things they find interesting in a “personal” way is has nothing to do with product. It’s a change of mindset and approach.
And it’s free.
(Image credit: Philippe Put)
Paul Williams says
Personal/personalised learning can be free, and in one way it always has been, but it has not been taken advantage of very much – right?
Between the bookends of teacher led instructivism or teacher controlled constructivism and a free for all learn anything in any way model, a social scaffold is required for personal learning.
Scaffolds for instructivism and constructivism abound. But there is rarely a social scaffold for personalised learning. Have a look at http://www.mme-moe.com to look at a social scaffold for personalsed learning for teachers.