For the past four years I have offered predictions of what I see around the corner for high-tech in K-12 schools (see December 26, 2009, December 30, 2010, December 29, 2011, December 27, 2012 posts), and December 10, 2013.
For this year looking ahead to 2025, I revisit those predictions and add a few more.
2012 was the year of the MOOC. Hysterical predictions of the end of higher education and the transformation of teaching soared through cyberspace and media (see here). For those who see MOOCs as a fine example of the Hype Cycle, I would continue to put MOOCs in the “Trough of Disillusionment” in 2014. Over the next decade that there will be a slow crawl–see here–up the Slope of Enlightenment as community colleges, state universities, and elite institutions figure out how to unbundle pieces of MOOCs and incorporate those pieces into revenue-producing programs. No MOOCS, however, for K-12 public schools.
For public schools in 2014, the debacle in Los Angeles Unified School District largest (and most expensive) adoption of iPads in the U.S. continues to shadow rollouts of tablets across the nation. Nonetheless, more and more tablets are in teacher and student hands. Blended learning, including “flipped” classrooms, continue to spread across the country. Many teacher and principal bloggers tout how they have integrated the use of new devices into daily lessons, including lessons for Common Core standards. I see no let-up in the spread of these devices as online tests to measure achievement of Common Core standards, already mandatory, extend to district tests. Policymakers and IT specialists continue to give one another high-five hand slaps in getting interactive whiteboards, laptops, and tablets to more and more teachers and students.
With all of the above occurring, one would think that by 2025, age-graded schools and the familiar teaching and learning that occurs today in K-12 and universities would have exited the rear door. Not so.
Getting access to powerful electronic devices for all students and teachers is surely a victory for those who believe in better technologies solving teaching and learning problems. But access does not dictate use, especially the kind of use that vendors and technophiles ardently seek.
For nearly three decades, I have written about teacher and student access to, and instructional use of, computers in schools. In those articles and books, I have been skeptical of vendors’ and promoters’ claims about how these ever-changing electronic devices will transform age-graded schools and conventional teaching and learning. Even in the face of accumulated evidence that hardware and software, in of themselves, have not increased academic achievement, even in the face of self-evident truism that it is the teacher who is the key player in learning not the silicon chip, enthusiasts and vendors continue to click their castanets for tablets, laptops, and other devices as ways of getting test scores to go higher (see The_Impact_of_Digital_
Amid that skepticism, however, I have often noted that many teachers adopted devices and software not only for home use but also for planning lessons, grading students, communicating with parents and other educators, and dozens of other classroom and non-classroom tasks. Nor have my criticisms of policymakers’ decisions to purchase extensive hardware (far too often without consulting teachers) prevented me from identifying (and celebrating) teachers who have imaginatively and creatively integrated new devices and social media seamlessly into their daily lessons to advance student learning.
My allergy, however, to rose-colored scenarios of a future rich with technology remains. So what might 2025 look like?
In the past four years, I have predicted that textbooks will be digitized, online learning will spread, and the onset of computer testing will create more access to devices across schools and accelerate classroom usage. These developments will occur incrementally over the next decade and will be obvious to observers but hardly dominant in K-12 age-graded schools.
While higher education textbooks have shifted markedly to e-books and less expensive ways of getting content into students’ devices, the K-12 market remains a proprietary domain of a handful of publishers (e.g. Pearson, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, and McGraw-Hill Education) in part due to the mechanics of certain states (e.g.Florida, California, and Texas) dominating which texts get chosen. But changes continue. Wake county (NC) and Vail (AZ) have adopted digitized texts; Florida will do so in 2015. Changes in K-12 texts will occur in bits and pieces as publishers adapt to the impact of the web.
K-12 online learning will also spread slowly, very slowly, as blended learning and“flipped” classrooms gain traction. Both of these innovative twists on traditional classroom teaching, however, will reinforce the age-graded school, not dismantle it.
None of these incremental changes herald the disappearance of K-12 age-graded public schools or the dominant patterns of teacher-centered instruction. What these gradual changes will translate into is a broad array of options for teaching and learning available to both teachers and students.
|
Brasileiro participa pouco em política; talvez por isso, é recordista em sentir-se desatendido pelo governo
É o que indica a pesquisa sobre atitudes globais de 2014 feita pelo Pew Research Center, um centro de pesquisas norte-americano que é dos mais respeitados do mundo na matéria.
Recordista mundial é um pouco de exagero, mas não muito. A pesquisa foi feita nos 33 países emergentes mais relevantes de todos os continentes.
Quando a pergunta era sobre se o governo se importava com a opinião do pesquisado, 90% dos brasileiros responderam "não".
É a maior porcentagem encontrada, superior até à já elevada média latino-americana (77%).
O brasileiro pode ser recordista em sentir-se desatendido pelo governo, mas essa sensação é generalizada no mundo todo ou, ao menos, nos países pesquisados.
"Maiorias em 31 dos 33 países pesquisados disseram que a maioria dos funcionários do governo não se importa com o que pessoas como eles [os pesquisados] pensam."
A pesquisa serve como explicação a posteriori para as grandes manifestações de junho de 2013, em que a grande reivindicação era por serviços públicos melhores.
Ou seja, a rua ferveu porque nenhum governo "ouviu" essa reivindicação ou, se ouviu, não se preocupou efetivamente em atendê-la.
Mas a pesquisa mostra também que o brasileiro limita sua participação política ao ato de votar --o mínimo que se espera de um cidadão em democracias.
Aliás, o brasileiro é também quase recordista, entre os 33 países envolvidos na pesquisa, em participação eleitoral: 94% dizem votar nas eleições, atrás apenas dos tailandeses (96%).
Entre as possibilidades de participação oferecidas pela pesquisa, em só duas delas a porcentagem de brasileiros que participaram passou de um dígito: 34% foram a eventos de campanha política e 13% assinaram petição de cunho político.
Nos outros itens, o resultado é desanimador: participação em protesto (9%), membro de organização política (4%), fez contato com algum funcionário (5%), participação em greves (7%), telefonou para programa de rádio/TV para dar opinião política (5%).
Mesmo nas redes sociais, que, ao menos na campanha presidencial, pareciam inundadas de mensagem políticas, a participação é mínima. Só 9% postaram mensagens políticas e menos ainda (7%) publicaram links para informações políticas.
Em todos esses itens, a participação dos brasileiros é inferior ou, na melhor das hipóteses, igual à média latino-americana, que é igualmente muito baixa.
A pesquisa apurou também que as elites (e os homens, a maioria entre elas) atuam mais.
"Aqueles com educação secundária ou mais alta, aqueles que acreditam que funcionários públicos se importam com suas opiniões e os homens participam mais em atividades políticas", diz o texto.
Tudo somado, tem-se uma democracia capenga: votar, todos votam, mas participar é coisa para poucos, assim como os benefícios se concentram em poucas mãos.
Mesmo assim, Feliz Natal.
.png)
.png)
