Upload
vutram
View
220
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Running Head: Embracing the Future
Embracing the Future
Megan Dowling
EDU 505: Future of Education
Jennifer Wojcik
Embracing the Future
Embracing the Future
Change is inevitable, therefore it is important to prepare for what the future holds. The
present paper suggests tablets, learning analytics (LA), achievement gaps, and increases in
minorities, poverty, and students receiving special education will affect the future of Red Hook
High School (RHHS). Each of these trends ties into the emergence of personalized education,
which creates more effective learning experiences (Greller & Drachsler, 2012).
Organization Information
RHHS, a New York state public school, serves 700 students in grades 9-12. The district
was founded in 1937, and community growth led to building the current high school in 1962.
The school’s mission focuses on providing a challenging educational environment for students to
develop the skills necessary to accept society’s duties and opportunities (RHHS, 2013).
RHHS’s exemplary test scores, graduation rates, and number of collegiate bound students
provide evidence that the school is meeting its mission and successfully serving its students. The
methods used to achieve success at RHHS include lecturing, discussions, debates, group work,
problem-based learning, and technology. RHHS teaching philosophies are evident in the
statement, “Experiences designed to develop students’ information literacy using both traditional
methods and new technology are integrated within the curriculum” (RHHS, 2013, par 3).
Literature Review
When creating a vision of the future, the environment needs to be scanned for current
trends that may impact the organization (Hines, 2006).
Technology Trends
Tablets. The Horizon Report is an internationally recognized publication addressing six
emerging technologies, the prospective time frame for each, and the trends and challenges these
2
Embracing the Future
technologies present (Johnson et al., 2013). Johnson et al. (2013) predicted tablets will become
prevalent within the year and praise this technology as a powerful tool that is cost effective,
encourages exploration, and ideal for building personalized learning environments.
Learning Analytics. LA, also among the technologies listed in the Horizon Report, are
expected to have the greatest impact in two to three years (Johnson et al., 2013). Measuring,
collecting, and analyzing student data allows teachers to personalize instruction and provide
early intervention for identified learning issues. Big data analytics have high potential, but
attention should also be paid to the challenges LA may present (Johnson et al., 2013).
Greller and Drachsler (2012) also promoted LA, but stressed the need to remain ethical in
its use. Their extensive research shows LA can support learners and teachers in better
understanding and predicting personal learning needs. Additionally, the reader is informed of
the barriers and limitations of LA, as well as how to address these issues (Greller & Drachsler,
2012), providing a well-rounded overview of the topic.
Economic, Public Policy, and Demographic Trends
The Achievement Gap. Bromberg and Theokas (2013) wrote, “For nearly two decades,
closing the achievement gap has been a focus of educators and policymakers” (p.2). The authors
analyzed NAEP results, revealing gaps exist along a spectrum from low to high performance,
and claimed closing the achievement gap means supporting all students. At both spectrum ends,
black, Hispanic, and low-income students performed lower than their white peers. With
increasing poverty and diversity (Fusarelli, 2011), gaps need to be addressed now, before they
widen. Gaps are closed when teachers examine data, identify student strengths and weaknesses,
and tailor instruction to meet the needs of each individual (Bromberg and Theokas, 2013).
Increasing Minority Populations. Fusarelli (2011) synthesized a large number of works
3
Embracing the Future
into an article on demographic, societal, economic, and educational trends, the majority of which
are expected to negatively impact children. He calls for reforming social policy, and while that
is beyond the scope of this paper, it is still imperative to acknowledge these trends.
Fusarelli (2011) states ethnic minority groups have composed the majority of population
growth since 2000. Betts, Hartman, and Oxholm (2009) also analyzed current trends. Even
though their research targets higher education, the section on minority growth is still relevant.
“By 2050, 62% of the nation’s children will be minority, with almost two thirds of them
Hispanic. Projected shifts will require that resources be devoted to addressing cultural
differences” (p.12). Respecting cultural differences implies knowing students as individuals and
personalizing instruction to address their diversity (Betts, Hartman, & Oxholm, 2009).
Increasing Poverty. Increasing childhood poverty is another trend Fusarelli (2011) listed
within his research, noting the connection between poor students and lower academic
achievement. Ladd (2012) focused on public policy solutions for addressing this negative
correlation. He believes policymakers need to create strategies that specifically address the
impact poverty has on educational outcomes, one of which is to tailor instruction to meet the
needs of these particular students.
Increasing Special Education. Cortiella (2011) wrote an article specifically addressing
learning disabilities, however the material can apply to special education in general. One of the
most important aspects to take away is that the number of students receiving instruction in
regular education has significantly increased in the past decade. Early interventions and
technology-assisted instruction will provide the support students with disabilities need in these
general education settings (Cortiella, 2011).
Futuring
4
Embracing the Future
The world is changing, and it is important education follows suit. Futuring entails
identifying these changes and predicting possible future events. According to Moorcroft (2007),
educators must use scenarios to help their students become independent. Futuring is the best
opportunity a teacher has to prepare students for what to expect beyond graduation.
Scenarios
Scenarios, narratives of future possibilities, are among one of many futuring techniques.
Futurists generate as many ideas as possible, then, based on importance and likelihood, they
narrow the list down to two to five distinct scenarios (Hines, 2006). The vision presented in this
paper is one possible future scenario.
Scenarios open minds to possibilities not previously considered (Mietzner & Reger, 2005).
Hines (2006) wrote, “the organization will be better served if it understands and prepares for a
range of possibilities” (p.20), which allows for more-informed decision making in the present.
Educators are able to place several plausible futures side by side and be better prepared for the
inevitable surprises they face in their classrooms.
Scanning
When creating scenarios, it is beneficial to use the futuring technique of scanning.
Scanning occurs when futurists examine the internal and external environment for relevant
trends. This technique is used once the foresight team is clear on the goals, problem areas, and
boundaries and extent of an activity. The goal is to identify all forces that can influence what the
future will be and prepare for their impact (Hines, 2006). By scanning for current technology,
economic, demographic, and public policy trends, RHHS can develop a vision of what the future
will look like, and properly prepare to meet this vision.
Description of Vision
5
Embracing the Future
As discussed above, the scenario futuring technique considers several possible futures.
The scenario under review in this paper consists of RHHS providing their students with a
personalized learning experience by the year 2017. Personalized learning is “the process of
contouring learning to individuals, recognizing that individuals inherently have different
strengths and weaknesses, interests and ways of learning” (Project Tomorrow, 2012, p. 1).
RHHS will continue to use Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) assessments to analyze
student data. The information provided by LA will then transfer into the classrooms, where
teachers and students will use tablets to personalize learning.
Rationale
Tablets. Between the years 2010 and 2011, the greatest increase in access to technological
devices was in the tablet category, which revealed a doubling in student access. Students are
drawn to this technology as a way to personalize their own learning due to the tablet’s ability to
connect to the Internet, the array of features and functions, and the breadth of applications
(Project Tomorrow, 2012). While students are increasing the use of tablets outside of school,
Johnson et al. (2013) predicted tablets will infiltrate schools within the next twelve months,
claiming the portability and intuitive interfaces make tablets ideal for “one-to-one learning” (p.
17).
Learning Analytics. Data analysis is a trend impacting many sectors of society, including
education. Schools can now analyze student data using LA to evaluate programs, improve
instruction, and target struggling learners (Greller & Drachsler, 2012). Johnson et al. (2013)
believed the educational horizon will see the rise of LA within two to three years and write “The
essential idea behind learning analytics is to use data and analyses to adapt instruction to
individual learner needs in real time, in the same way that Amazon, Netflix, and Google use
6
Embracing the Future
metrics to tailor recommendations and advertisements to consumers” (p. 20).
Population Increases. Recent trends reveal increased numbers of minorities, students
living in poverty, and students receiving special education. All of these populations benefit from
personalized instruction (Bromberg & Theokas, 2013; Betts, Hartman, & Oxholm, 2009;
Cortiella, 2011).
Increased ethnic diversity. Minority populations, Hispanics in particular, are rapidly
increasing. “By 2050, 62% of the nation’s children will be minority, with almost two thirds of
them Hispanic,” indicating the need to focus our resources on cultural differences and gaps in
language skills (Betts, Hartman, & Oxholm, 2009, p.12). Therefore, teachers need to approach
instruction in a new way to try to accommodate for this growing diversity. LA can help identify
where these students struggle and excel, thus allowing for early interventions and customization
of the learning experience (Greller & Drachsler). Personalization through LA and tablets enable
educators to respect the students’ cultural differences (Betts, Hartman, & Oxholm, 2009, p.12).
Increased childhood poverty. Child poverty is also increasing, with African Americans
and Latinos experiencing the greatest impact (Fusarelli, 2011). Ladd (2012) believed the solution
is to track the individual needs of low-income children and implement ways to address these
needs. Teachers can identify the students’ needs by analyzing data (Ladd, 2012).
Increased special education. There has also been a slight increase in the number of
students qualified for special education. Technology is proven to support students with
disabilities, however, many of these students are not able to use technological devices within the
instruction they receive (Cortiella, 2011). By employing tablets in classrooms, RHHS will give
students with disabilities the extra support or curriculum modifications they need. Additionally,
LA can help identify struggling learners and provide early interventions to eligible special
7
Embracing the Future
education students (Johnson et al., 2013).
Achievement Gaps. Closing the achievement gap has been on the agendas of educators
and policymakers for the past twenty years, yet despite various efforts gaps still exist “at both the
low and high ends in every grade and subject” (Bromberg & Theokas, 2013, p. 9). After
conducting a research study, Bromberg and Theokas (2013) noted achievement gaps can be
improved by examining data, setting goals, identifying student strengths and weaknesses, and
tailoring instruction to meet these needs. LA and tablets make these practical solutions.
Challenges
The implementation of LA and tablets within the future vision of RHHS presents several
challenges. One challenge is that technology constantly changes (Project Tomorrow, 2012),
implying there may be better learning technologies by 2017. Each teacher must figure out how
to utilize tablets to best meet the needs of their particular students, because what model works
best for one teacher may not work for another (Project Tomorrow, 2012). Using new technology
in general also presents a challenge due to the fact that many teachers do not have the skills to
properly integrate these technologies into their instruction, indicating a need for professional
development (Johnson et al., 2013). Personalized learning, in particular, requires the teacher to
evolve from the role of leading instruction to a role of moderating student-centered learning
(Project Tomorrow, 2012). Another challenge of this vision is that using LA to analyze student
data could lead unwanted consequences such as manipulative control over teachers, so it is
important schools remain ethical in their use (Greller & Drachsler, 2012).
Opportunities
Allowing students to use technology in the classroom to personalize their learning
experience will result in better student engagement and motivation (Project Tomorrow, 2012).
8
Embracing the Future
Students have reported that being able to use mobile technologies in school, such as tablets,
would enable them to research information, communicate with others, access online textbooks,
receive reminders, and record lessons to later review (Project Tomorrow, 2012). There are also
countless opportunities that arise thanks to the remarkable diversity of applications available on
tablets (Johnson et al., 2013). Additionally, the inclusion of LA enables students to receive
personal recommendations for learning paths and resources, teachers to become aware of
knowledge gaps, focus on struggling students, and develop curriculum, and schools to attempt to
improve drop-out and graduation rates by monitoring student performances (Greller & Drachsler,
2012). “Applied analytics can help transform education from a standard one-size-fits-all
delivery system into a responsive and flexible framework, catered to meet the students’ academic
needs and interests (Johnson et al., 2013, p. 20).
Implications of Not Personalizing RHHS
Minority, special education, and poor students have been linked with lower levels of
achievement when compared to their peers (Bromberg & Theokas, 2013). According to
Fusarelli (2011), “the concentration of poverty in a school had an important relationship to
achievement—as the proportion of poor students in a school increased, student performance on
achievement tests in both 8th and 10th grades and in every location generally decreased” (p.
226). Betts, Hartman, and Oxholm (2009) state, “Failure to more fully address the educational
needs of our rapidly growing minority populations threatens our nation’s future” (p 13). If
RHHS fails to meet the personal needs of these growing populations, it is likely that the
achievement gaps everyone has been working so hard to reduce will actually grow, which is why
using LA and tablets to personalize learning is so important for the future of education.
Preparation
9
Embracing the Future
RHHS recently started using NWEA’s assessments to measure student progress in core
subjects. To the LA RHHS put in place, Greller and Drachlser (2012) offered a framework of
six interconnected dimensions organizations need to follow: stakeholders, objectives, data,
instruments, external constraints, and internal limitations. The school can use the framework “as
a checklist when designing a purposeful LA process” (p.45). RHHS has also introduced iPads in
one of its classes, however the use thus far has consisted primarily of gaming. This indicates the
need for professional development (PD) that targets connecting tablets with pedagogy and
content. PD will also be needed to support teachers as their role changes from teaching content
to facilitating student-centered learning. In addition, teachers will need to start embedding
personalized formative assessments “depending upon the standards, content, and the child. This
may include performance-based assessments, observations, or applications of knowledge in a
group” (Wolf, 2010, p. 23). Furthermore, establishing professional learning communities (PLC)
will enable teachers to collaborate over best practices, student data, and issues that arise.
Wolf (2010) wrote, “personalized learning requires a shift in the enterprise of schooling,”
which encompasses parents, community members, teachers, school and district leaders, and state
and federal regulators (p. 28). The enterprise needs to create policies and conditions that align
with this new vision. This requires all stakeholders to research personalization, “form a policy
action network to implement state and district policies that support personalized learning, and
develop a shared understanding of the vision, definitions, and effective communication of
personalized learning” (Wolf, 2010, p. 31).
Call to Action
According to Wolf (2010) the highest priority step to take in personalizing education is to
“expand research and development aimed at studying redesign for personalization models and
10
Embracing the Future
practices…sharing what works and the road map for getting there” (p. 31). RHHS can tackle this
step by creating a community of practice (CoP), where all stakeholders can communicate with
one another and confirm the details of bringing personalized learning to Red Hook. This CoP
could be an online open forum; Web 2.0 technologies allow community members to reflect on
ideas, organize resources, and give feedback to others (Gunawardena et al., 2009). The multiple
perspectives present in a CoP will allow stakeholders to “identify differences in understandings
and weaknesses in their explanations” (Gunawardena et al., 2009, p .11). Additionally, CoP
members can select a committee that would be responsible for reviewing all of the ideas, fully
evaluating proposals, and approving models to be considered for adoption (Project Tomorrow,
2008). Establishing a committee provides the necessary leadership to move forward with ideas,
while allowing all educational stakeholders to participate in mapping out the redesign.
Conclusion
There is no way of knowing precisely what the future holds, however, constant change
implies it will differ from today. Futuring prepares organizations for what is yet to come. Based
on current trends, the vision for RHHS is a movement towards personalization. Tablets and
learning analytics enable students to create their own personal learning environments (Johnson et
al., 2013) and let teachers examine data and personalize instruction (Greller & Drachsler, 2012;
Johnson et al., 2013). The achievement gap and growing minority, impoverished, and special
education populations also suggest individualizing learning for students to achieve to the best of
their abilities (Betts, Hartman, & Oxholm, 2009; Bromberg & Theokas, 2013; Cortiella, 2011;
Fusarelli, 2011; Ladd, 2012). The educational enterprise needs to map out the details of
personalized learning and prepare its teachers for this educational shift.
11
Embracing the Future
References
Betts, K., Hartman, K., & Oxholm, C. (2009). Re-examining & repositioning higher education:
Twenty economic and demographic factors driving online and blended program
enrollments. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 13(4), 3-23. Retrieved from
http://sloanconsortium.org/jaln/v13n4/re-examining-amp-repositioning-higher-education-
20-economic-and-demographic-factors-drivi
Bromberg, M. & Theokas, C. (2013). Breaking the glass ceiling of achievement for low-income
students and students of color. Education Trust, 1-17.
Cortiella, C. (2011). The state of learning disabilities. New York, NY: National Center for
Learning Disabilities.
Fusarelli, L.D. (2011). School reform in a vacuum: Demographic change, social policy, and the
future of children. Peabody Journal of Education, 86(3), 215-235. doi:
10.1080/0161956X.2011.578955
Greller, W. & Drachsler, H. (2012). Translating learning into numbers: A generic framework for
learning analytics. Educational Technology & Society, 15(3), 42-57.
Gunawardena, C. N., Hermans, M. B., Sanchez, D., Richmond, C., Bohley, M., & Tuttle, R.
(2009). A theoretical framework for building online communities of practice with social
networking tools. Educational Media International, 46(1), 3-16. doi:
10.1080/09523980802588626
Hines, A. (2006). Strategic foresight: The state of the art. The Futurist, 40 (5), 18-21. doi:
http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1016/j.techfore.2009.12.003
Johnson, L., Adams Becker, S., Cummins, M., Estrada, V., Freeman, A., & Ludgate, H. (2013).
NMC Horizon Report: 2013 K-12 Edition. Austin, Texas: The New Media Consortium.
12
Embracing the Future
Retrieved from http://www.nmc.org/pdf/2013-horizon-report-k12.pdf
Ladd, H.F. (2012). Education and poverty: Confronting the evidence. Journal of Policy Analysis
and Management, 31(2), 203-227. doi: 10.1002/pam.21615
Mietzner, D., & Reger, G. (2005). Advantages and disadvantages of scenario approaches for
strategic foresight. Int. J. Technology Intelligence and Planning, 1(2), 220-239. doi:
10.1504/IJTIP.2005.006516
Moorcroft, R. (2007). The art of the clairvoyant.
Project Tomorrow. (2008). Leadership in the 21st century: The new visionary administrator.
Retrieved from http://www.blackboard.com/resources/k12/k12_newvisionaryadmin.pdf
Project Tomorrow. (2012). Personalizing the classroom experience: Teachers, librarians and
administrators connect the dots with digital learning. Irvine, CA: Project Tomorrow.
Red Hook High School [RHHS]. (2013). Red Hook high school. Retrieved from
http://www.redhookcentralschools.org/site/Default.aspx?PageID=2
Wolf, M.A. (2010). Innovate to educate: System [re]design for personalized learning; A report
from the 2010 symposium. Washington, D.C.: Software & Information Industry
Association.
13