The “Research” Question
WWII Pilots:
“The flak only gets heavy when you’re over the target.”
Innovators and visionaries know that, when their
vision begins to gain traction, those who have something to lose should the old
paradigm change, will eventually challenge the new vision. This is particularly true regarding
education. It is to be expected .
. . still hurtful, but to be expected.
Educational visionaries who have been around for
a while and who have been through a tussle or two, can quickly spot the
opposition. Typically, the signal
that your vision is being challenged comes in the form of a question, a
question that is made to sound protective of young students but, most
frequently, is a veiled challenge that is protective of the adult and the
status quo.
“Do you have any research that shows that this works?”
The question requires a response. And actually, the question might signal
an opportunity for the visionary to get his/her act together, to provide a
strong rationale as to why educators, parents, and learners should be willing
to trust him/her, to be clear in communicating that rationale to a variety of
audiences.
The problem with most transformational visions is
that there IS NO PLACE to go to see the vision in operation. The very nature of a bold vision is
that it has not been proven. Even
though the Inevitable: Mass Customized Learning vision is backed by a solid
rationale and has nearly universal support, “where is the research.”
The MCL Rationale
The “research” question is based upon
a false assumption, one that must be challenged quickly and upfront, i.e.,
"the question assumes that today's Industrial Age schools are research
based." They were not and they are not! They were designed to
be "administratively convenient," just like all other Industrial Age
systems and structures. And, in all sincerity, THAT WAS RIGHT FOR THE TIME, IT
WORKED! . . . in the Industrial Age.
Research.
The
four statements that follow, written in laymen’s terms, have consensus validity
with nearly everyone who has studied learners and learning. We might call them research findings,
opinions of experts, accepted theory, common understandings, or whatever, but
educators, past and present, believe them to be solid truths regarding learning
and learners:
1. That learners learn best when they are
challenged but not overwhelmed or bored, when they are met at their individual
learning level . . . "do you agree with that statement?"
2. That learners learn best and fastest
when they are learning in one of their strongest learning styles . . . "do
you agree with that statement?"
3. That learners learn best when they are
interested in the content that is being used to facilitate their learning . . .
"do you agree with that statement?"
4. That learners learn best when they find
the content relevant to their lives and the lives of their parents . . .
"do you agree with that statement?"
Well, if you agree with those four statements
regarding learning and, more specifically, "intrinsic" motivation, then MCL is very research
based as it allows, encourages, and makes it possible for teachers and school
systems to consistently apply all four of our most solid beliefs and
understandings regarding learners and learning.
Our present bureaucratic, Industrial Age assembly
line:
1. Encourages
teachers to teach all learners at one level when we know they do not learn at
the same rate, at the same time,
2. Encourages
teachers to lecture and make assignments when we know that the learning styles
of today's digital learners requires more interactive modes of learning,
3. Forces
the teacher to limit the content options available to learners and therefore
significantly diminishes learner interest, and
4. Leaves
teachers with the challenge of teaching content, concepts, and skills that
learners find irrelevant . . . like, "when will I ever use this!"
“Mass Customization” in general is highly
“researched” and has proven to be highly successful.
· Apple and iTunes used mass customization to take over the music
industry.
· Amazon used mass customization to flip the book market.
· Wikipedia used mass customization to become the encyclopedia of
choice.
· Google and Bing used mass customization to make libraries a place to
store “print” books.
· Yahoo home page used mass customization to make the NYT just one of
the newspapers we read in the morning . . . and it’s the digital version, for
free.
We might ask record companies, bookstores, Encyclopedia
Britannica, librarians, and news paper publishers if they think mass
customization has been “researched.”
If we want research-based learning, it must be
some type of MCL. If we want our present Industrial Age school structure
to continue, then don't expect teachers and school systems to be "research
based." We are kidding ourselves if we think that today’s schools are
research based. Industrial Age schools were never designed for learners
and learning. They were designed for "administrative
convenience." (If you have been a secondary principal and have
constructed efficient master schedules, you readily acknowledge that this
statement is true.) The best that our best teachers, and the best of our
best Industrial Age schools can ensure . . . . is that they are applying the
best research of the best outdated Industrial Age schools.
Significant research is about learners and
learning, not about how to best learn in a system that is not designed with the
learner in mind in the first place. (cjs) (bmcg)
Sorry that my last post didn't take . . . let me try again.
Mass Customizing:
- Not just meeting your individual needs . . .
- But meeting everyone's needs, simultaneously . . .
- Other professionals get to work with one client at a time . . . great, but that's not mass customizing . . .
- Teacher have 25 - 30 clients at a time . . .
- Now that's "Mass Customizing . . .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
