Ask HN: Education is broken, how do you fix it?
For the past few years, there has been a worrying trend in education. Bill Gates has even blogged about it just last week. While everyone agrees we need a departure from the rote memory method of learning to one which involves critical thinking and decision making, how would you go about implementing this in a real life class format? Do away with text books and work with Case Studies like Harvard? What other methods could work?
23 comments
Hey man! Nice question. Our current system of education was designed for 19th century industrialism, yet today we’re preparing our kids for jobs that don’t yet exist, using technology that hasn’t been invented, to solve problems we can’t yet imagine.
We need to gear learning towards the 21st Century Set of Literacies: how well we can find information, validate it, synthesize it, leverage it, communicate it, collaborate with it and problem solve with it. And we need to be developing self-driven learners who are confident thinkers, socially mature, engaged in their communities, resilient in the face of life's challenges and adaptable to change.
How does this play out in the classroom? With a greater focus on critical reflection, teachers need to be Socratic and philosophic in their outlook. Teachers need to act as vital facilitators and motivators, reflecting the move towards a focus on self-directed learning. And they need to be highly trained in emotional intelligence, reflecting a greater focus on behavioural and non-cognitive skills.
I've written an essay about this on my personal blog if you're keen (thecreativefiles.com)
We need to gear learning towards the 21st Century Set of Literacies: how well we can find information, validate it, synthesize it, leverage it, communicate it, collaborate with it and problem solve with it. And we need to be developing self-driven learners who are confident thinkers, socially mature, engaged in their communities, resilient in the face of life's challenges and adaptable to change.
How does this play out in the classroom? With a greater focus on critical reflection, teachers need to be Socratic and philosophic in their outlook. Teachers need to act as vital facilitators and motivators, reflecting the move towards a focus on self-directed learning. And they need to be highly trained in emotional intelligence, reflecting a greater focus on behavioural and non-cognitive skills.
I've written an essay about this on my personal blog if you're keen (thecreativefiles.com)
[deleted]
The high school I taught at for several years was working to lessen the usage of textbooks and primarily work with literature and primary source materials. In the history department, we delivered facts using lectures or a textbook reading. Basically, the idea was to give the students enough facts that they could then interpret and critically think about literature and the primary source materials.
My testing was mainly essay based as it gave me the best view of whether or not the students actually understood the material. It also gave them the opportunity to learn how to better communicate what they knew, as opposed to only what a teacher was asking. For instance, students might completely know the circumstances and events surrounding the War of 1812, but forget things like the names of forts or specific battles or dates. That student could perform poorly on a multiple choice exam, but do tremendously well on an essay test.
Scantron test = easy as hell to grade. Essay test = you actually have to know what you're teaching.
I also believe that teacher credentialing has backfired. Credentialing programs are basically made up of $10,000 of busywork and make it so anyone that can put up with doing busywork can get through (exceptions exist). If I were in charge, I would have some sort of apprenticeship system where new teachers learned from the best teachers.
End note: it is also kind of silly that you need a college degree and a credential to teach elementary school. Shouldn't everyone be proficient enough at elementary school concepts when they graduate high school that they could then teach the basics to others?
My testing was mainly essay based as it gave me the best view of whether or not the students actually understood the material. It also gave them the opportunity to learn how to better communicate what they knew, as opposed to only what a teacher was asking. For instance, students might completely know the circumstances and events surrounding the War of 1812, but forget things like the names of forts or specific battles or dates. That student could perform poorly on a multiple choice exam, but do tremendously well on an essay test.
Scantron test = easy as hell to grade. Essay test = you actually have to know what you're teaching.
I also believe that teacher credentialing has backfired. Credentialing programs are basically made up of $10,000 of busywork and make it so anyone that can put up with doing busywork can get through (exceptions exist). If I were in charge, I would have some sort of apprenticeship system where new teachers learned from the best teachers.
End note: it is also kind of silly that you need a college degree and a credential to teach elementary school. Shouldn't everyone be proficient enough at elementary school concepts when they graduate high school that they could then teach the basics to others?
it is also kind of silly that you need a college degree and a credential to teach elementary school. Shouldn't everyone be proficient enough at elementary school concepts when they graduate high school that they could then teach the basics to others?
This is a really important issue to understand. Good teaching is difficult, even at the elementary level. Good teaching includes: - responding to each student's learning style; - answering questions in a way that sets students up for deeper learning in later years; - meeting each student where they are at, and allowing them to progress at their own pace each year; - dealing effectively with students who come to school hungry, abused, neglected and so forth; - a host of other situations that are difficult to deal with effectively, but for which solutions have been developed.
This ties in well with one of your other observations: I also believe that teacher credentialing has backfired. Credentialing programs are basically made up of $10,000 of busywork and make it so anyone that can put up with doing busywork can get through (exceptions exist).
In my experience as a teacher, I have seen this consistently. There is one local teacher ed program where I live, and the administrators pride themselves on running a "challenging" program. It is challenging in the volume of work required, not in the intellectual effort required. There are so many bad effects of this approach, and so many potentially good effects if an intellectually rigorous and challenging program took its place.
I have also had an incredibly frustrating experience dealing with certification. I started teaching in one state, and taught there for 7 years. When I moved, I was granted temporary certification based on having held full certification in another state. I have hosted student teachers, and generally been recognized as an effective teacher. But after a few years in my new state, I was told I had to go back and do a student teaching program because the paperwork from my old state didn't fill in the right boxes on the paperwork in my new state. Utter BS, and this is exactly the kind of stuff that drives good teachers out of education.
I chose to stay in education and not let myself get pushed out by stupid bureaucratic issues. I resolved to do my part in addressing these issues, though, and I am grateful to be working with a staff that is tackling hard education issues effectively.
This is a really important issue to understand. Good teaching is difficult, even at the elementary level. Good teaching includes: - responding to each student's learning style; - answering questions in a way that sets students up for deeper learning in later years; - meeting each student where they are at, and allowing them to progress at their own pace each year; - dealing effectively with students who come to school hungry, abused, neglected and so forth; - a host of other situations that are difficult to deal with effectively, but for which solutions have been developed.
This ties in well with one of your other observations: I also believe that teacher credentialing has backfired. Credentialing programs are basically made up of $10,000 of busywork and make it so anyone that can put up with doing busywork can get through (exceptions exist).
In my experience as a teacher, I have seen this consistently. There is one local teacher ed program where I live, and the administrators pride themselves on running a "challenging" program. It is challenging in the volume of work required, not in the intellectual effort required. There are so many bad effects of this approach, and so many potentially good effects if an intellectually rigorous and challenging program took its place.
I have also had an incredibly frustrating experience dealing with certification. I started teaching in one state, and taught there for 7 years. When I moved, I was granted temporary certification based on having held full certification in another state. I have hosted student teachers, and generally been recognized as an effective teacher. But after a few years in my new state, I was told I had to go back and do a student teaching program because the paperwork from my old state didn't fill in the right boxes on the paperwork in my new state. Utter BS, and this is exactly the kind of stuff that drives good teachers out of education.
I chose to stay in education and not let myself get pushed out by stupid bureaucratic issues. I resolved to do my part in addressing these issues, though, and I am grateful to be working with a staff that is tackling hard education issues effectively.
I agree that there is more to teaching than simply knowing and understanding the concepts. My overall message is more that credentialing is not the best way to train new teachers.
I'd also argue that credentialing is also used to limit the number of teachers entering the field to keep wages higher, but I suppose that is another matter entirely :)
I'd also argue that credentialing is also used to limit the number of teachers entering the field to keep wages higher, but I suppose that is another matter entirely :)
See Harvard Graduate School of Education report "Pathways to Prosperity: http://www.gse.harvard.edu/news_events/features/2011/Pathway...
Some interesting strides have been made by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills in changing how we learn and also how we measure learning success:
http://www.p21.org/
Even Apple threw its hat in the ring with Challenge Based Learning:
http://www.apple.com/education/challenge-based-learning/
Without doubt the current models being used in the US don't work. We aren't teaching the right skills, we aren't measuring skills the right way (uniform class-wide tests EOY) and the funding structure for schools encourages bureaucracy and corruption at times.
However, the problems are all tightly intertwined in one ball. I would caution against thinking that 'modern tech' is a cure all. Going from paper to iPads won't solve all of the issues in a day. That said, some really cool companies are killing it. Take a look at Edmodo.
Wish I had more time to get into this, alas, back to my code cave.
Some interesting strides have been made by the Partnership for 21st Century Skills in changing how we learn and also how we measure learning success:
http://www.p21.org/
Even Apple threw its hat in the ring with Challenge Based Learning:
http://www.apple.com/education/challenge-based-learning/
Without doubt the current models being used in the US don't work. We aren't teaching the right skills, we aren't measuring skills the right way (uniform class-wide tests EOY) and the funding structure for schools encourages bureaucracy and corruption at times.
However, the problems are all tightly intertwined in one ball. I would caution against thinking that 'modern tech' is a cure all. Going from paper to iPads won't solve all of the issues in a day. That said, some really cool companies are killing it. Take a look at Edmodo.
Wish I had more time to get into this, alas, back to my code cave.
Everyone keeps saying Education system is broken, and to some extent it is. Here's some reasons why...
1. with advancements in technology, education too needs to evolve, but we are still stuck in the era of printed books and expensive text books. I remember seeing a computer for the 1st time in grade 7. It took me few years to understand the complete potential and how I can use it. Now, kids in pre-school are hooked to iPad games and have figured out ways to watch cartoon on demand. Thus going to school to learn about animals from textbook pics is not very inspiring and interesting.
2. For higher education, the school text books are still stuck in the 90's technology. School needs to engage students with more hands-on work, rather than lectures. Hands-on project building and training is a very useful tool for learning and has proven to be more engaging among students of all ages. [Shameless advertisement : checkout my workshops on robotics at workshop.iroboticist.com]
1. with advancements in technology, education too needs to evolve, but we are still stuck in the era of printed books and expensive text books. I remember seeing a computer for the 1st time in grade 7. It took me few years to understand the complete potential and how I can use it. Now, kids in pre-school are hooked to iPad games and have figured out ways to watch cartoon on demand. Thus going to school to learn about animals from textbook pics is not very inspiring and interesting.
2. For higher education, the school text books are still stuck in the 90's technology. School needs to engage students with more hands-on work, rather than lectures. Hands-on project building and training is a very useful tool for learning and has proven to be more engaging among students of all ages. [Shameless advertisement : checkout my workshops on robotics at workshop.iroboticist.com]
[deleted]
[deleted]
I think some of the others may agree with me...just teahch through technology. Make more places like khanacademy etc. Technology will disrupt the current system and through it people will be able to meet and stabilize a new system since it'll show people that learning is in new ways is possible. Bill and Melinda Gates foundation are funding Khanacademy and are excited about many sites like them, with technology we can answer more questions faster and help teachers focus on answering important questions while not repeating menial ones.
speaking for myself as a learner, the only things I've learned to a very high level (foreign languages, computer science, maths, etc ) have all been things that I've had an immense amount of self interest in and have dedicated tons of time to. In the us educational system I think one of main problems is that you take a lot of subjects you don't need and another is that most subjects are not presented in a problem solving approach manner.
It might just be my opinion, but I don't think sociology, anthropology, or even anatomy have any reason for being on a high school curriculum. It seems much more important to me to give students in this age group a really solid understanding of core areas: math, physics, literature / writing (i.e. the analytical thought and expressive process), and foreign languages (for today's world I'd also add computer science). If you know and comprehensively understand the above areas there's nothing stopping a high school student from majoring in any field imaginable.
As far as the second area is concerned I think this just has to do with less busy work and more active thought and problem solving engagement. For instance, force students to come up with their own formulas for finding the area of a square BEFORE you show them the formula and steps for sovling the equations. I think this helps engrain knowledge and internalize it, also this is how everything in the real world works anyway, and prepares students for their future career choices.
Those are just some of my thoughts...
It might just be my opinion, but I don't think sociology, anthropology, or even anatomy have any reason for being on a high school curriculum. It seems much more important to me to give students in this age group a really solid understanding of core areas: math, physics, literature / writing (i.e. the analytical thought and expressive process), and foreign languages (for today's world I'd also add computer science). If you know and comprehensively understand the above areas there's nothing stopping a high school student from majoring in any field imaginable.
As far as the second area is concerned I think this just has to do with less busy work and more active thought and problem solving engagement. For instance, force students to come up with their own formulas for finding the area of a square BEFORE you show them the formula and steps for sovling the equations. I think this helps engrain knowledge and internalize it, also this is how everything in the real world works anyway, and prepares students for their future career choices.
Those are just some of my thoughts...
Your comments makes me wonder if educators are too focused on having students memorize specific information they deem necessary as opposed to being obsessed about equipping students with the necessary skills to learn anything.
School can also be incredibly boring for students with interests outside the narrow scope of the specified curriculum. I found that many students that 'didn't like history', just hadn't found a topic they could really sink their teeth into. Once they did -let's say food in a particular time period- we could then build off that interest to learn about that time period as a whole (politics, society, wars, economics etc...)
School can also be incredibly boring for students with interests outside the narrow scope of the specified curriculum. I found that many students that 'didn't like history', just hadn't found a topic they could really sink their teeth into. Once they did -let's say food in a particular time period- we could then build off that interest to learn about that time period as a whole (politics, society, wars, economics etc...)
There is so much hype and talk about this it's making me sick. Too much tunnel vision. We need a drastic innovation.
As in a streamlined system built for our age. It needs to be agile.
We do education like we build products but we all know that after a four year degree more often than not we don't have 'product/ market fit'. We should train, test and iterate in small time frames.
We do education like we build products but we all know that after a four year degree more often than not we don't have 'product/ market fit'. We should train, test and iterate in small time frames.
[deleted]
> how would you go about implementing this in a real life class format?
Allow experienced professional educators to shape education policy.
Allow experienced professional educators to shape education policy.
Indeed, letting teachers decide what to do on the basis of what's rasiest and most convenient for them is bound to have a 1:1 correspondence with the best way for people to learn.
> Indeed, letting teachers decide what to do on the basis of what's rasiest and most convenient for them is bound to have a 1:1 correspondence with the best way for people to learn.
I consider myself a professional educator, so I will treat this statement as if you were aiming it directly at me.
I'm not yet 10 years into my career, but I daresay I have a solid understanding of what facilitates effective learning among my students. I can quickly, accurately, and individually asses and guide my students on a path which best suits their needs.
There is nothing a standardized test in my subject area can tell me about my class that I don't already know, and there is much that a standardized test will not reveal about the individuals within my class that I and my colleagues already know.
I would like to see my students freed from wasting their valuable time preparing for absurd tests which do not serve them in any useful or meaningful fashion. My admins know how my students are doing because they receive reports directly from me. They know my word is good because I am a professional.
The implementation of my wish to eliminate meaningless standardized testing and have more control over my curriculum would not earn me one more cent than I currently make. (I make less than 45k / year and I'm 6 years into it with a masters degree.)
I love my work and seeing my students succeed is why I do it.
I consider myself a professional educator, so I will treat this statement as if you were aiming it directly at me.
I'm not yet 10 years into my career, but I daresay I have a solid understanding of what facilitates effective learning among my students. I can quickly, accurately, and individually asses and guide my students on a path which best suits their needs.
There is nothing a standardized test in my subject area can tell me about my class that I don't already know, and there is much that a standardized test will not reveal about the individuals within my class that I and my colleagues already know.
I would like to see my students freed from wasting their valuable time preparing for absurd tests which do not serve them in any useful or meaningful fashion. My admins know how my students are doing because they receive reports directly from me. They know my word is good because I am a professional.
The implementation of my wish to eliminate meaningless standardized testing and have more control over my curriculum would not earn me one more cent than I currently make. (I make less than 45k / year and I'm 6 years into it with a masters degree.)
I love my work and seeing my students succeed is why I do it.
Allow experienced professional educators to shape education policy.
What in particular is stopping experienced professional educators from shaping educational policy now? What are some of the policies that you expect would look different if your suggestion were implemented?
What in particular is stopping experienced professional educators from shaping educational policy now? What are some of the policies that you expect would look different if your suggestion were implemented?
> What in particular is stopping experienced professional educators from shaping educational policy now?
Overwork, bureaucracy, an anti-teacher and anti-intellect culture to name a few.
> What are some of the policies that you expect would look different if your suggestion were implemented?
NCLB and RTTT would be eliminated. Equity of access to schooling which facilitates critical thinking would be made a paramount goal. Long story short -- educators would try to shape our system to model Finland's philosophies.
Overwork, bureaucracy, an anti-teacher and anti-intellect culture to name a few.
> What are some of the policies that you expect would look different if your suggestion were implemented?
NCLB and RTTT would be eliminated. Equity of access to schooling which facilitates critical thinking would be made a paramount goal. Long story short -- educators would try to shape our system to model Finland's philosophies.
How would you implement this? Would you eleminate all elected officials from education policy, such as local boards of education? Who would determine what qualifies as an "expereinced, proffessional educator"?
> How would you implement this?
Include experienced professional educators in on the creation and updating of NCLB, RTTT, or any policy aimed at education.
> Would you eleminate all elected officials from education policy, such as local boards of education?
No.
> Who would determine what qualifies as an "experienced, professional educator"?
Similar to what happens within the law, medical,or any other professional community -- a team of professional, accomplished people within the specific field would set the bar and determines who qualifies.
Include experienced professional educators in on the creation and updating of NCLB, RTTT, or any policy aimed at education.
> Would you eleminate all elected officials from education policy, such as local boards of education?
No.
> Who would determine what qualifies as an "experienced, professional educator"?
Similar to what happens within the law, medical,or any other professional community -- a team of professional, accomplished people within the specific field would set the bar and determines who qualifies.
how about involving actual companies to come in and let them interact with the students? For example, the marketing department of an FMCG company could ask students to prepare a marketing campaign when students take up a marketing course.
this should be accompanied with the government providing tax benefits to the organization that indulge in this initiative, which would not only help in advertising and marketing, but will also catch the eye of organisations for their own benefit.