Failure to Innovate

By Hans Mundahl | November 05, 2010 | Comment |

I’m very pleased to see that education reform has been in the news lately but I’m concerned at the direction the dialog is taking.

Too many pundits, educators and leaders are focused on ways we can reform the education system as we know it. Couldn’t we set our sights a little higher and consider education innovation rather than education reform? Shouldn’t we be asking if the fundamentals of school (homework, classes, desks, subject area teachers) do what we need them to do?

These are the questions I try to explore and (I hope) begin to answer in this video.

What do you think, does ed-reform go far enough? Do the fundamentals of school work adequately? Do we need reform or innovation? Let us know in the comments!

Hans Mundahl

Hans Mundahl has taught since 1995 when he first stepped to the front of a classroom as a Fulbright Exchange Teacher in the former East Germany. Since then he has been working to create stimulating educational experiences for students that combine cutting edge tools with durable skills. Hans is currently the Director of Experiential Learning and Technology Coordinator at the New Hampton School. He writes regularly for EdSocialMedia and has had his work (and the work of his students) featured on YouTube, Livestream and SlideShare.

http://twitter.com/steveritchie Steve Ritchie

This is outstanding, Hans.
http://twitter.com/peterdbaron Peter Baron

Hans, I’m amazed by the way you were able to reframe the thinking around ed reform in 3+ minutes.
http://create-learning.com/blog michael cardus

Hans truly enjoyed your video and the thoughts you provoked.And education is currently (and has always been) a heavily bureaucratic organization that EVERY person feels that their opinion is valid and necessary. Additionally the polity of the system creates odd blocks in innovation because schools are not seen as valuable resources, and teachers can systematically fall into tenured positions that work against innovation. This has been a struggle that dates into the Platonic era, and adjusted w/ Dewey and now something else.The idea of schools changing must happen and the question of Why? perhaps is being considered 2nd…I see many school buying “smart boards” and other tech, and the why is, “other schools are doing it” then these tech. become the tread-mill in the basement (only used as a drying rack for sweaters)…You are proposing great ideas.
http://twitter.com/go_adventures eriqpowers

I don’t see how we can have reform without innovation – however, we shouldn’t underestimate the value that traditional schools offer – students working in groups, (face-to-face – as opposed to facebook) and interacting with an authentic and effective teacher. Modern schools must be adaptable – able to provide the right mix of technology, interaction, and experience – to hit home with many different learners. And, if we want to be MOST effective, we should take a holistic approach to education – remembering that students are more than what happens in school.
Hmundahl

@Michael As you point out the question of ‘why change’ is ultimately the most important one. If we can adequately answer this then the natural follow on of ‘how to change’ will be much easier.nnThese are the questions that led to industrial schools ie. “Why Change: We need more workers for industry and our schools aren’t producing them” so “How to Change: Make school like the factory.”
Hmundahl

@eriqpowers Lots going on in your comment… I completely agree that online classes are not the solution. That’s artificial and largely devoid of human contact though I admittedly have never taken or taught a class this way so I don’t know. I like the idea of outsourcing some of the less interesting parts of ed like content delivery so kids and teachers can be more interactive and hands on.nnOn example of this that calls into question the very basic assumptions we have of homework is flip teaching: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/businessclub/7996379/Daniel-Pinks-Think-Tank-Flip-thinking-the-new-buzz-word-sweeping-the-US.htmlnnI love what you said about holistic approaches.nnWhat I mean by reform is making the same system better without asking if the system is needed, example: chalk board replaces hand slate, white board replaces chalk board, smart board replaces white board… but I’m not convinced we need a board at all… maybe we need to circle up under a tree?
http://www.cricketCD.com Peter Evans

Yale has been featuring photos of Sterling Memorial Library in fund raising videos aimed at the heartstrings of alumni who studied there. A sonorous voice backed by soft strings tells us that Yale needs our money to help it to lead the world toward a new future. How preposterous to use this white elephant of the past to spin a vision for the future! Sterling’s $29 Million legacy (depression dollars!) is now a liability to the campus, taking up most of a city block in the center of campus, most of the information contained within can be accessed from any dorm room with Wi-Fi. You don’t need to search for the catalog card any more. You don’t need to hike to the 9th floor of the stacks and walk to the properly numbered row and locate the shelf where the book you want to read resides. Oh, I almost forgot. In these days of heightened security a paid member of the library staff must make the trek for you. A few keystrokes will usually suffice to access the same information today.nnWhen it was completed in the 1931, Sterling was one of the largest repositories of printed information in the world. http://www.library.yale.edu/news/briefhistory.html Built in the style of a Gothic cathedral, the knowledge tree of Sterling Library enabled Yale to attract the best and brightest to New Haven to taste its fruit. Today they use it to attract money and pitch “the future”.nnMy point is that Yale has a very muddled vision of the future. Most universities are struggling with their future business models. In relative dollars it costs an enormous amount of money to attend college when compared to a couple of generations ago. A college degree is no longer a requirement to high income as in 1931 when Sterling Library opened its doors. Hans’ economic model of the 5 hour internet school looks great in comparison to Yale’s model where most kids don’t pay full freight and full freight doesn’t cover Yale’s actual cost of educating a student. No wonder they’re looking for endowment money!nnEd innovation must speak to what is important in commerce and society. Hans touched on many of these, albeit briefly. Educational systems must shape their programs to address these areas of importance. Ah, but which areas are important? nnMaybe we should begin by imagining what sort of library we would build today if we had John W. Sterling’s financial legacy to spend today (more than $416M after adjusting for inflation).
Hmundahl

@Peter – thanks for your thoughtful comment!nnI agree with what you wrote when you said: “Ed innovation must speak to what is important in commerce and society.” If we can articulate what we need then it becomes easier to deliver on that. One possible answer to this is Richard Florida’s work on the Rise of the Creative Class http://www.creativeclass.com/richard_florida/books/the_rise_of_the_creative_class/ which makes a compelling case that we don’t need an industrial or even a service class as much any longer, rather a creative class.
Dutch Dresser

@celsphere I enjoyed your thoughts about reform and innovation in education; they provoked me to write some thoughts I’ve had recently about these matters. Those thoughts can be found here:nnhttp://dutchd.posterous.com/pages/educational-reform-innovationnnThank you for your efforts; they are provocative and important.nnHarry “Dutch” Dresser
Hmundahl

@Dutch – thanks for the comment and your thoughtful reflection. In particular your point about credentials struck a chord for me – if traditional institutions can’t deliver on what the workplace needs then someone else will.