The Knowledge Gatekeepers

disengagededucator

Why is is that some people with an awful lot of knowledge thinks it’s okay to devalue same?  We are all familiar with Sir Ken Robinson and his cry for ‘soft skills’ like creativity to be as valued as highly as knowledge. If we skip over the argument that the more knowledge you have the more creative you can be, I think there is something a bit amiss here.

What would be the motive of educators with vast stores of knowledge telling kids they don’t really need it as much, that in the 21c employers are looking for creativity, problem-solving, collaboration, entrepreneurship etc? I guess the simple answer is that they see the world changing and they want our students to fit into it. They want students to be fitted with the skills that 21c employers are looking for. Let’s skip over another argument here, shaping students for work is…

View original post 357 woorden meer

Education in Sweden: false ideas, weak training, limited support

Improving Teaching

Are you just going to write about how lazy Swedish teachers are?”
Swedish teacher, to me.

My posts on Swedish education so far have criticised behaviour and pedagogy harshly.  It might seem that I blame teachers.  I don’t.  I agree with Jonas Linderoth, who criticises:

School debaters, pedagogical researchers, officials, unions, teacher educators and politicians…  (Dagens Nyheter (paywall, Swedish)).”

Teachers should be well-informed, teach challenging lessons and maintain good behaviour.  It’s hard to blame them for struggling to do so if they have to overcome false ideas, weak training and limited support.  Swedish teachers labour under all three burdens.

False ideas

Per Kornhall cites research which notes the School Inspectorate criticised high-performing schools in the Nineties for being ‘too knowledge-focused’ (Skolvärlden (Swedish)). What has been promoted instead?  Sverigesradio devoted an episode of ‘Psykobabblarna’ to ‘Kommunikoligi’.

Communes spend great sums on courses in which, for example, leaders do creeping exercises to become better…

View original post 764 woorden meer

Wat heeft het onderwijs NU nodig?

Blogcollectief Onderzoek Onderwijs

Randvoorwaarden voor de verdieping van Onderwijs2032

Er wordt veel gepraat en geschreven over het onderwijs. Zaken als het lerarentekort en de problemen in het rekenonderwijs drukken ons met de neus op de feiten. Wat heeft het onderwijs nodig om de problemen de baas te worden en met vertrouwen toekomstgericht te zijn? ‘Ons Onderwijs2032’, ook wel het Rapport Schnabel genoemd, is een poging om het onderwijs aan te passen aan de eisen die de maatschappij in deze tijd stelt. Wij stellen vast dat een aantal belangrijke elementen nog aan het voorstel ontbreken.

Als individuele docenten met verschillende visies heeft ieder van ons zich actief met dat debat bemoeid. Voor buitenstaanders, en soms ook voor onszelf, leek het alsof onze individuele ideeën en oplossingen heel ver uit elkaar lagen. Er wordt dan snel geconcludeerd: ‘zoveel docenten, zoveel verschillende meningen, we moeten toch verder.’ Wij zijn bij elkaar gaan zitten en…

View original post 1.094 woorden meer

Assembling ClassDojo

code acts in education

A sociotechnical survey of a public sphere platform

Ben Williamson

ClassDojo mojo

The world’s most successful educational technology is ClassDojo. Originally developed as a smartphone app for teachers to reward ‘positive behaviour’ in classrooms, it has recently extended significantly to become a communication channel between teachers and parents, a school-wide reporting and communication platform, an educational video channel, and a platform for schoolchildren to collect and present digital portfolios of their class work.

In a previous post I began sketching out a critical approach to the ClassDojo app. In this follow-up (note that it’s a long read, more a working paper than a post)  I want to explore ClassDojo as a more extensive platform, and to consider it as a sociotechnical ‘assemblage’ of many moving parts. It is, I argue, simultaneously composed of technical components,  people, policies, funding arrangements, expert knowledge and discourse, all of which combine and work together as a…

View original post 5.872 woorden meer

The Dunning-Kruger Effect: A Poisonous Paradox

3-Star learning experiences

By Paul A. Kirschner & Mirjam Neelen

Does the following sound familiar to you? You’re discussing a topic that you know quite a lot about and which you have probably spent many years studying and mastering. Suddenly someone who knows nothing about the subject interjects some kind of statement that makes no sense at all, however (s)he has a very strong opinion and seems to think that (s)he is quite competent. Not only that: (s)he’s convinced that (s)he’s right and that you’re wrong! And whatever you say or do, your discussion partner doesn’t bend; (s)he sticks to her/his guns. Well, this happens to the two of us all the time. It’s frustrating and annoying to us grumpy but (fairly) knowledgeable people and it’s known as the Dunning-Kruger Effect.

Dunning Kruger

Psychologists Justin Kruger and David Dunning published an article in 1999; Unskilled and unaware of it: How difficulties in recognizing one’s own…

View original post 833 woorden meer

Who should we invite into our schools to speak to teachers?

Filling the pail

Staff development is a responsibility that should not be taken lightly. Schools have limited time and money available and so there is a moral duty to try to ensure we don’t waste it. Even with the best of intentions, this can be tricky and so I offer a few factors that you might want to consider.

Who?

Does the speaker have a relevant academic qualification in the area that she intends to speak about? I wouldn’t suggest this is essential but it is worth considering. I am often critical of education academics but at least they generally recognise the complexity of schools and are less likely to make bold, unsupported pronouncements.

Does the speaker have teaching experience? This is not necessary if she is there to merely inform teachers about psychological principles or what the research shows in a particular area. But if the intention is to promote an initiative…

View original post 534 woorden meer

Onderwijs2032. Antwoord aan Frans van Haandel

Dick van der Wateren

Beste Frans,

Dank voor je uitvoerige reactie en ook nog dank voor het boek ‘Wiskunde in je vingers’ van Joost Hulshof en Ronald Meester dat je me voor de zomer stuurde.

Zoals we al eerder vaststelden zijn er op de meeste punten geen wereldschokkende verschillen tussen onze standpunten. Samen met de reacties van anderen op jouw en mijn blog lijkt me dit een uitstekende basis om komend najaar het oorspronkelijke voorstel Ons Onderwijs 2032 te vormen tot iets waar leerkrachten en leraren mee kunnen werken.

In de eerste plaats valt mij op dat vooral wiskundigen zich het meest kritisch uitspreken over O2032: jij, Karin Verheijen, Joost Hulshof, Erik Korthof, Nicole Verhoeven. Dat kan toeval zijn, maar vanuit het perspectief van mijn wiskundecollega’s kan ik me de kritiek op het rapport O2032 en de zorg over een eventuele stelselwijziging goed voorstellen. De twee voorbeelden van rekenopgaven die je in jouw post…

View original post 1.702 woorden meer

8 reasons to ditch traditional teaching methods

Filling the pail

I advocate explicit instruction. Explicit instruction takes the traditional or default approach to teaching and modifies it to make it even more explicit and highly interactive.

This method has its origins in research from the 1960s and 1970s into the behaviours of the most effective teachers and it has been verified since then across a range of different study designs and subjects. You can read more here.

Yet you won’t hear much about explicit teaching if you wander into a education school seminar or a professional development workshop. You won’t read much about it on popular websites for teachers. Instead, you are likely to be encouraged to adopt an implicit or ‘child-centered’ approach. These come in many guises but the common ingredient is that the teacher takes a step back and the students are expected to make some key decisions or figure out some of the concepts for themselves.

Proponents…

View original post 1.315 woorden meer

Economic papers about education (CPB part 1)

Christian Bokhove

Introduction

It feels as if there has been an incredible surge of econometric papers in social media. Like a lot of research they sometimes are ‘pumped around’ uncritically. Sometimes it’s the media, sometimes it’s a press release from the university, sometimes it’s even the researchers themselves who seem to want a ‘soundbite’. These econometric papers are fascinating. What they often have going for them -according to me- is their strong, often novel, mathematical models (for example Difference in Differences or  Regression Discontinuity Design. I also like how after presenting results there often are ‘robustness’ sections. However, they also often lack a sufficient literature overview; one that often is biased towards econometric papers (yet, it is quite ‘normal’ that disciplines cite within disciplines). Also, conclusions, in my view, lack sufficient discussion of limitations. Finally, I often find that the interpretation of the statistics is a bit ‘typical’, in that econometric…

View original post 1.873 woorden meer

What about (21st C.) skills & education? 1. Roots and sources

Ben Wilbrink

We have met already some skills, haven’t we? We have skills as contrasted with ‘knowledge the world doesn’t pay for any more’ (Andreas Schleicher on camera 2′ 07″). Some skills are claimed to become especially important in the 21st century, but why would that be? Those 21st century skills supposedly are generic in character, yet psychologist wisdom has it that there are no such generic skills. Wait a minute, those skills are just the cognitive ones, implying there to be another tribe of non-cognitive skills, also dubbed soft skills. Are they also 21st century skills, then? Maybe 21st century personalities, such as grit and mindset? Thinking was a typical 19th century generic skill, to be exercised by the study of Latin, and mathematics of course; until Thorndike showed such miracles to be highly improbable — and Latin disappeared from the American curriculum. Are the 21st century skills of creativity, problem-solving, cooperating and critical thinking just the 21st century resurrections of the 19th century misconception of thinking as some kind of ‘brain muscle’?

Reading the fascinating story of research on expertise, by Anders Ericsson and Pool (2016), makes one wonder how it is possible not to see that deliberate practice in the specific domain is key to achievement, any achievement at all, in that domain. Also, did Andreas Schleicher hit a nerve with his remark on ‘pay’ as a criterion for what belongs in education, and what not? Is there a labor market bias in the educational imperialism of the OECD? If so, let us keep in mind that the labor market shouldn’t be the alpha and omega of education policies, and examine the economist arguments. For me, this is an exciting venue, having done some thinking and research myself on transits from education to labor markets (Wilbrink, 1994), as well as on strategic science policy (Wilbrink & Roos, 1991).

One way to get some answers to these vexing questions is to search for the roots of the idea of 21st century skills. According to Patrick Kyllonen (2016) work by David Autor, Frank Levy and Richard J. Murnane (2003) might have sparked the hype.

  • Related to the concepts of personality and noncognitive skills is the concept 21st-century skills, a buzzword meaning skills that are emerging in importance for success in the 21st-century workplace. The expression itself may owe some of its currency to an influential study by the economists Autor, Levy and Murnane (2003), who showed that since the infusion of information technology into the workplace in the 1960s and 1970s there have been significant changes in the growth and decline of various occupations and lines of work. In particular, in a relatively short period of time routine analytic and manual tasks (e.g., record keeping, repetitive customer service, repetitive assembly) have become increasingly automated and therefore taken over by computers, but nonroutine analytic tasks (e.g., managing others, persuading/selling, legal writing) have not, which has affected the availability of jobs that require the skills associated with these tasks.
    Source: Kyllonen 2016

John Weinberg (2005), in his review of the (2004) book by Levy and Murnane, confirms that the emphasis is on generic skills. Employers who believe these generic skills to exist, will not be overly enthusiast on investing in generic skills development of their employees; job hopping employees will appropriate their investment, their newly acquired generic skills being of value on the labor market also (see Phillips 1987 for a 20th century description of that kind of problem). There is a problem, then: who is going to invest in generic skills? It is a version of the perennial problem: who is going to pay for education and training: student, taxpayer, or employer? (Jacques van Hoof, 1987; Phillips, 1987) Here the definition of ‘generic’ is somewhat loose: a specific skill is a skill that is useful in the employer’s firm only; a generic skill then is every other kind of skill. That is not exactly the psychologist’s definition of what is a generic skill. More on this kind of problem later, in discussing the interesting and especially informative Autor (2015) paper.

There is a direct link from Autor, Levy and Murnane to the OECD branch of education: a Levy (2010) paper titled ‘How technology changes demands for human skills’. Also in the first OECD-report solicited by the Dutch Platform Onderwijs 2032 (task: reform of the Dutch curriculum in elementary and secondary education; advisory report) the first reference is to Autor, Levy & Murnane (is that right, Ben? Yes, it is right, although the reference is to 2013 (not 2003), and not included in the references list 😉 ). It seems that the Autor et al. paper is a key publication in the search for roots of the idea of 21st century skills. Autor et al. are economists, studying labor markets in terms of employment of groups differing in levels of skills, that is: in levels of education. The Autor et al. ‘skills’ need not be anything like 21st century skills of creativity and all the rest of. I expect these economists to be somewhat sloppy in their use of ‘skills’, making their work even more interesting for deconstruction of these 21st century skills. For example, OECD’s Michaela Horvathova (2015) as well as Levy (2010) bend the Autor at al. conclusions in the direction of OECD’s ed reform ideology, substituting ‘21st century skills’ for Autor’s dimension of lower-higher levels of education. Even more key to this venture is the already mentioned Autor (2015) paper. As an appetizer this quote from Levy:

  • This paper places the competencies to be measured by the OECD’s Programme for the International Assessment of Adult Competencies (PIAAC) in the context of the technological developments which are reshaping the nature of the workplace and work in the 21st century. The largest technological force currently shaping work is the computer. Computers are faster and less expensive than people in performing some workplace tasks and much weaker than people in performing other tasks. On the basis of an understanding of the kinds of work computers do well, it is possible to describe the work that will remain for people in the future, the skills that work requires and the way that computers can assist people in performing that work. The paper argues that a technology-rich workplace requires foundational skills including numeracy and literacy (both to be tested in PIAAC), advanced problem-solving skills or Expert Thinking (similar to the construct of Problem Solving in Technology-Rich Environments to be tested in PIAAC) and advanced communication skills or Complex Communication (not being tested in PIAAC).
    [source: Levy (2010) abstract]

The above claims by Frank Levy are not supported by the evidence available, in my opinion (I will have to write a blog dedicated solely to these claims by Levy). Not by evidence from psychology (Ericsson & Pool is a fine introduction), not by evidence from Levy’s colleague Autor as given in his 2015 ‘Why Are There Still So Many Jobs? The History and Future of Workplace Automation.’ Let it suffice, for now (I will blog later on this paper), to sum up Autor’s main points.
– ‘Skills’ in this paper stand for levels of education, not for anything even remotely resembling what others have dubbed to be ‘21st century skills’.
– For the quality of a school, a firm, and even an economy, it is of some importance that levels of skill are somewhat equal (The ‘O-ring argument’). As an example I offer that growing numbers in higher education can be absorbed by the labor market precisely because the labor market evolves and is able to evolve in the direction of more knowledge-intensive jobs by more academic supply of labor. Sounds like a circular argument? See Wilbrink & Dronkers (1993).
– Really fascinating is the contrast between jobs disappearing because of automation (in agriculture in the 20th, because of information technology in the 21st century) and rising employment elsewhere because of rising levels of productivity in the economy. The disappearance of jobs is highly visible, as are its causes, while the resulting rise in employment is not easily seen to ultimately result from the same causes, in particular higher productivity. Also, many jobs will become more productive because ‘automation complements labor’, as Autor expresses it.
– Autor, in this 2015 paper, looks only at the impact information technology has had on jobs and employment (these are different phenomena in his analysis); the question then is: what about other factors, such as outsourcing, the global economy, and the financial sector?

Let me be somewhat more precise on what Autor and his colleagues Levy and Murnane (2004) understand these skills to be; after all, ‘levels of education’ does not explain much. Nothing typically ‘21st century skill’ can be read (yet at Paris OECD headquarters they do) into the following descriptions Levy & Murnane (p. 47-8) give of ‘expert thinking’ and ‘complex communication’. On the contrary, the skills are not special at all, except for their supposedly not being vulnerable for computer take-over. Their chapters 4 (expertise explained as pattern recognition, the authors forgot to explain pattern recognition, however ;-)) and 5 (but why would ‘complex communication’ be anything different from expertise?) elaborate on these skills.

  • Expert thinking: solving problems for which there are no rule-based solutions. Examples include diagnosing the illness of a patient whose symptoms seem strange, creating a good tasting dish from the ingredients that are fresh in the market that morning, repairing an auto that does not run well but that the computer diagnostics indicate has no problem. By definition, these are not tasks that computers can be programmed to do. While computers cannot substitute for humans in these tasks, they can complement humans in performing them by making information more readily available.
  • Complex communication: interacting with humans to acquire information, to explain it, or to persuade others of its implications for action. Examples include a manager motivating the people whose work she supervises, a biology teacher explaining how cells divde, an engineer describing why a new design for a DVD player is an advance over previous designs.
    Source: Levy & Murnane 2004, 47-8

This blog relates different uses of the term ‘skills’ to each other in a schematic way, thereby indicating one possible source for the 21st century skills craze: an over-generalizing interpretation of economist studies on the recent impact of information technology on the labor market. Lots of issues remain to be analyzed and discussed. Because of its (in my eyes) highly informative quality, the Autor (2015) article will be the subject of a following blog in this subseries on skills.
For now, the mystery remains unsolved how it is possible for the educational branch of the OECD to propagate ‘21st century skills’, citing work of Autor, Levy and Murnane (see the literature list) that definitely does not support a ‘21st century skills’ creativity, problem-solving and critical thinking interpretation.

literature

David H. Autor (2015). Why are there still so many jobs? The history and future of workplace automation. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 29, #3 Summer, 3-30. pdf

David H. Autor, Frank Levy and Richard J. Murnane. 2003. The skill content of recent technological change: an empirical exploration. Quarterly Journal of Economics 118, 1279–1333. abstract and the article itself pdf.

Centraal Planbureau (2011). Nederlandse onderwijsprestaties in perspectief. [Dutch education achievements in perspective.] CPB Policy Brief 2011/05. webpage

Anders Ericsson & Robert Pool (2016). Peak. Secrets from the new science of expertise. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. info on the book

Jacques van Hoof (1987). De abeidsmarkt als arena. [The arena of labor market politics] Dissertation Tilburg University. open access

Patrick C. Kyllonen (2016) Designing tests to measure personal attributes and noncognitive skills. In Suzanne Lane, Mark R. Raymond & Thomas M. Haladyna: Handbook of test development (190-211). Routledge. info on the book and proof of this chapter

Frank Levy (2010). How technology changes demands for human skills. OECD Education Working paper No. 45. pdf

Frank Levy and Richard J. Murnane. 2004. The new division of labor: how computers are creating the next job market. Princeton University Press. info on book and free access Ch. 1.

OECD, Michaela Horvathova (2015). Paper #1: Evidence about knowledge and skills for work and learning. pdf

Jack J. Phillips (1987). Recruiting, training and retaining new employees. Managing the transition from college to work. Jossey-Bass.

Platform Onderwijs 2032 Advisory Report

André Tricot & John Sweller (2014). Domain-specific knowledge and why teaching generic skills does not work. Educational Psychology Review preview & concept

John A. Weinberg (2005). review of The new division of labor by Levy and Murnane (2004).

Ben Wilbrink (1994). Arbeidsmarkt en hoger onderwijs: een blijvend problematische relatie. Tijdschrift voor Hoger Onderwijs, 12, 24-32. [in Dutch only] webpage [mechanisms of crowding out]

Ben Wilbrink & Jaap Dronkers (1993). Dilemma’s bij groeiende deelname aan hoger onderwijs. Een verkennende studie. Nr. 17 in de reeks Achtergrondstudies Hoger onderwijs en Wetenschappelijk onderzoek van het Ministerie van Onderwijs en Wetenschappen. ISBN 9034628698. webpage [in Dutch; the literature reviewed is mostly English however]

Ben Wilbrink & Marco Roos (1991). ‘Strategic science policy and organizational structures in the engineering sciences.’ congress paper. Advisory Council on Higher Education (ARHO) & Advisory Council on Science and Technology Policies (AWT), The Hague, The Netherlands) webpage

  • Strategic science policy is not fundamentally different from what strategic education policy should be. The big challenge being: what are feasible positions to consider, as regards the future in one or two decades time? In science, the strong backbone is its (global) disciplinary structure. It would risk disaster for science policy to try to change that (global) disciplinary structure into something more (local) interdisciplinary. The same kind of thing in education: blurring the traditional school disciplines into problem based learning might turn out to result in economic disaster. (CPB, 2011)

blogosphere

Donald Clark (April 4, 2012). Thorndike (1874 – 1949) – experimental rigour, transfer and why Latin is a waste of time. blog

  • Ludwig Haag & Elsbeth Stern (2003). In search of the benefits of learning Latin. Journal of Educational Psychology, 95, 174-178. pdf

Michael Fordham (22 November 2016). The long road to critical reading: against the ‘quick-fix’. blog

  • Years and years of education are required to get a child to the point where he or she has the knowledge base of an interested generalist; this is sort of what Hirsch means when he talks about ‘cultural literacy’. This is why we have tried for so long to identify ‘quick fixes’ that get around the knowledge problem: critical reading strategies to deploy, generic questions about audience and purpose, and so on. Whilst I am not against encouraging pupils to show a healthy degree of scepticism about what they read, I would nevertheless suggest that the single most helpful thing we can do for our pupils is to teach them as much knowledge as we possibly can.

Gavin Kelly (May 10, 2017). The sticking power of false narrative. blog

  • There is an endless river of reports, summits and policy commissions flowing forward with a hyperbolic account of the unprecedented disruption we are living through. The trouble is that some of these claims are demonstrably untrue, while others are merely highly questionable. Typical job tenure, for instance, is much the same as it was a generation ago (it’s actually risen slightly). Job-hopping has fallen sharply. We move around for work less than we used to in the 1990s. The assumptions underpinning doomy projections about tech and jobs are very suspect. We’ve never had more work yet in important respects our jobs market has become less, not more, dynamic (..). Sure, many things are changing and there will doubtless be shifts in how we work not least due to technology. But when, you might ask, wasn’t that the case?

Ben Wilbrink (21 september 2016). Het is me wat met die vaardigheden van de 21e eeuw. ECBO Nieuwsbrief 21ste-eeuwse vaardigheden. gastcolumn

first series of blogs in reverse chronological order