Bea McGarvey and I had a great day yesterday in Lindsay, CA.  We felt validated!  Humble, but validated.  The Lindsay Community School District is one of ten recipients of the US Office of Ed Race to the Top competition.  Lindsay's proposal was based on Inevitable: MCL and their district will receive $10 million to make the MCL vision a reality.  Such an opportunity!

We are confident that Lindsay can transform the Industrial Age, Assembly Line approach to education . . . and not so much because of the $10 million dollars, but because of the leadership of Superintendent Tom Rooney, his leadership team, the Lindsay staff, Board, and Community.  Lindsay has been working toward a MCL system for a few years with some very good success already.  It all started when Bea helped Lindsay to create a Strategic Design and when Tom Rooney consciously and consistently made their mission and customized learning vision the basis for all decisions . . . decisions large and small.

Yesterday, the 50+ people who will be most responsible for the implementation of the Lindsay plan had the opportunity to listen to the impact that MCL has already had on learners.  Eight HS learners talked with our group about their experiences and accomplishments.  The subtitle to Inevitable is "Learning in the Age of Empowerment," and learner empowerment was ON DISPLAY when the learners told their stories.  Responsibility for learning had obviously moved from the teacher to the learner.  Extrinsic motivators had given way to intrinsic desires to learn and succeed.  Learners were talking about their futures past HS graduation.  Lifelong learning no longer a slogan on a wall, but being demonstrated by teenagers.  Bea and I left "pumped" and more positive than ever about the future of learning and learners. (cjs)

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 . . .  

Great news today! It's Inevitable: Customized Teaching and Learning -- a Fieldbook For and From the Field has been completed, published, and is now available on Amazon.com.

We announced earlier that we had updated/revised Inevitable: Mass Customized Learning to include a chapter describing our Elementary School Vision. The addition of the Elementary Vision chapter expands our relevance to elementary school educators and parents significantly.

But because of some Amazon.com rules and policies, it is a bit difficult for buyers to know which book is being purchased. We asked CreateSpace, our publishers, and Amazon.com to stop giving buyers an option as the new version of Inevitable includes everything that was in the first edition . . . and all for the same price. We are afraid that buyers will not know that there is a new version and will be disappointed . . . and maybe a bit angry . . . when they learn that they have purchased an outdated version of our book.

So, when you go to Amazon.com to purchase Inevitable, make sure that you see the little note on the bottom left of the book which states "Includes New Elementary Vision." The new version has a 2012 copyright. (cjs)

We have good news today . . . on two fronts. One, the updated Version of Inevitable: Mass Customized Learning has been revised to include a chapter that describes the Inevitable Elementary School vision. Tis available From Amazon.com or in bulk by contacting either Chuck or Bea. The new chapter is the companion chapter to chapter 7, Lori Does Her Learning Plan which helps to describe the MCL High School vision. The new Elementary School vision chapter is also available free of cost at our masscustomizedlearning.com website.

We have come to realize that some MCL advocates are interpreting our vision about how systems can/will meet the learning style needs of every learner in a more complex manner than we intended. And this may be a good thing. This note is not about telling anyone to “shape up,” but rather to inform you of our intent when we were “visioning” and writing.

When we were writing, dreaming, and visioning, we were part dreamers, but also part pragmatists. We wanted our MCL vision to be very desirable but, at the same time, wanted the MCL to be doable . . . doable as perceived by our readers and especially doable as perceived by school leaders and teachers.

How is this learner outcome best learned?

We think that one of the major contributions of Inevitable is to be learner focused when determining how learning opportunities are created and made available to learners. We suggest that, for each learner outcome (LO), educators think “how is this LO best learned rather than the typical response of “how should we teach this LO.”

How is this LO best learned options

Chapter 9, Ready For Rollout, Critical Element #3, states that school systems, “Have categorized Learning Outcomes by learning format.” We thought/think that this task is best approached by first identifying which learner outcomes can be best learned via online learning. In fact, we were thinking of the need to first divide LOs into only two categories, those learned best (most efficiently and effectively) online and those LOs learned best in some other format.

Our/the rationale for this approach was pragmatic inasmuch as we believe that the more we can use technology to help learners demonstrate LOs, the more time teachers will have to teach those LOs that require interaction, hands-on approaches, coaching, etc. An interesting note here – when we ask groups to estimate what percentage of LOs can be best learned online, we get answers that typically range from 50% to 75%. Elementary teachers are usually in the lower range here and HS teachers are at the higher range.

Chapter 9 then suggests some options for those LOs that require formats other than online learning . . . e.g. seminars, projects, mentoring, etc.

The “Rub”

The “rub,” or the conflict (and it may be a good conflict) comes at this point, and it comes with the interpretation of the “meeting the learning style of each learner.” So here comes the pragmatic, secondary principal in our thinking! Do we suggest that each learner will be given learning style choices about each LO that does not fit into the online learning category, or do we suggest that there will be a “best way” for all/most learners to learn to demonstrate those LOs.

The complexity created by expecting a number of options for each LO outcome that falls outside on the online leaning category, is great . . . e. g., technology might be able to schedule 5 ways of learning to “write and defend a business plan,” but actually making each of those options available to each learner would be near impossible.

So, in short, when we said that each learner will have his/her learning style met, we were expecting that that would entail each learner being presented with the “how is this LO best learned option.” We continue to believe that customizing to this point would be doable (and probably preferable, but that needs discussion).

And further, there is a big difference between how a secondary principal schedules a learning opportunity (those that are not “best learned” online) and how a Learning Facilitator team actually delivers that learning opportunity. E.g., the master schedule groups learners for the Business Plan LO, but when the group comes together, the Learning Facilitators do their thing by personalizing that learner outcome to meet the learning styles and learner interests. Some will use the Internet for gathering info, some will have conversations with a banker, some will learn from their Mom, etc.

So, as we think about it now, we can have the best of both worlds if we group according to “how is this LO best learned” for those LOs not learned best online, and expect that the learning facilitators will provide options once the learners walk through their door . . . or meet at the bank conference room. We think that this win-win first focuses on the learner but, in turn, also considers the pragmatic needs of the system and the system leadership.

We don’t expect this communication to be a final word, but we hope that it frames a discussion of the topic for further clarification . . . and maybe even for some decisions. (cjs and bmc)

We are frequently getting requests to go see the school that is described in the video titled Lori Does Her Learning Plan. (The video is available through the masscustomizinglearning.com website or directly through YouTube) Sorry, but Inevitable: Mass Customizing Learning is only a vision at this point. Since the publication of the book, many school districts are taking "starter steps" so that they are ready for the "on ramp" when the technology catches up with the vision. A field book to help educators and school systems negotiate that on ramp is scheduled to be available sometime this summer. Some exciting "starter steps" that will be part of that Fieldbook are now available on our website.

When we write, we attempt to share ideas and get people excited about innovative visions that have the potential to improve learning for learners. Later, if and when the book is successful, we learn in reverse some of the things that made the ideas/visions fly. When Bill Spady and I wrote Total Leaders for AASA, we didn't realize that it was probably the only "Ed Leadership" book that looked at education through leadership eyes. Other leadership books looked at leadership through old, entrenched, unsolvable "educational issues" eyes. The Total Leaders Framework allowed educational leaders see their role from a much larger perspective. They were able to see things anew, out-of-the-box you might say.

Inevitable: Mass Customized Learning was written for K-12 educators, but because your humble authors believe that our high schools are most in need of transformation, our major emphasis was on the secondary school level. Chapter 7, which deals with Lori doing her schedule, has been an important tool in helping readers to understand the Inevitable vision. (see the Lori Does Her Learning Plan by clicking on the Youtube icon) Since publication, we have been frequently asked to provide examples for the elementary educators. We have done that, and that new chapter, Chapter 11, is now available on our website. Feel free to download it and copy it for your colleagues if you wish. Go to resources on our website (masscustomizedlearning.com) and click onto it. It is in a power point format.

Just today I learned that Apple now has in excess of 40,000 educational apps. The questions . . . why is Apple doing that? Why are we educators not doing that? Why hasn't ASCD taken that on? Apps will be a large part of any Mass Customized Learning success and we are sitting on our hands. MCL is Inevitable, either we do it or Steve Jobs will. Just saying . . . (cjs)

Nancy submitted a very interesting question . . . "What suggestions are there for special education students in the MCL environment?" The short answer is that there doesn't have to be anything special . . . just do it. Special Education got it first with personalized learning plans (IEPs) for all learners. The big difference was that that concept was not scalable before today's mass customized technology. Today we are capable of doing for each learner what we were legally bound to do with special education learners way back when.

The question . . . what happens with the "highly qualified teacher"? Will there be training for teachers to become learning coaches?

A question from Nancy . . . Are there parts of MCL that could be implemented even if the whole district or school is not doing it?

This entry is specifically for the Inevitable Book Study Group, but the question and our response can be generalized.

Three of the ten questions we received had to do with “what do we do with the unmotivated learner?” Tis a good question and one that we get when we present the MCL vision to practitioners. We have chosen a stair-step approach to our response . . . that is, our points tend to be stacked on each other to reach our final conclusion. SO, we will number our points.

1. We believe (as do most educators with whom we work) that a desire to learn is the natural state of people . . . young and old. So the problem with learner motivation is not about the learner, but with a system that is not designed to motivate/engage the learner.

2. Learning is natural and rather easy when we are intrinsically motivated. However, schools are designed to control the learner with the use of extrinsic. rewards . . . the most obvious extrinsic reward/punishment is our ABC grading system. When the reward is stopped, the compliant behavior is also expected to stop. In short, we buy kids off to get compliance with extrinsic rewards. (Not blaming anyone here . . . that’s just the way it is. This is how schools have been designed and operated for more than 100 years.)

3. So what are those intrinsic motivators that MCL allows us to apply? We believe that there are three big ones. One, we are motivated to learn when what we are being asked to learn meets our learning level. That is, when we have the “prerequisite learnings” as Madeline Hunter taught us; when we are challenged but also believe that we have a good opportunity to be successful. MCL not only allows this intrinsic motivator, but encourages it – our present assembly line does not. Two, we are motivated when we are able to apply our most effective learning style. MCL allows and encourages this intrinsic motivator – our present delivery of instruction is typically a one-size-fits-all approach. Three, we are intrinsically motivated when we are learning via content that is of interest of us. MCL makes this motivator available – our present system does not.

4. We think that it is a bit unfair to think of how an unmotivated learner would react to MCL if he/she were asked to take responsibility for his/her own learning at age 15. But what if each learner would be introduced to MCL sometime in the early grades. Our experience is that the intrinsic motivators leave our system and our learners around the fourth or fifth grade, and students are conditioned to expect to run on extrinsic rewards/punishments.

5. Nearly every school system with which we have worked has a stated goal of “creating self-directed life-long learners.” How can we be true to that very worthy goal without consciously and intentionally working to make that goal a reality? Telling students what they must do until they graduate to get the rewards certainly cannot be considered a reasonable strategy.

6. But the bottom line regarding learner maturity necessary to function as a motivated learner is that MCL allows the system to structure each learner’s activities according to his/her ability and willingness to take responsibility. We assume you have read Chapter 7, Lori Does Her Learning Plan. That chapter may appear idealistic, but we don’t think so. We believe that if we begin early and focus on the intrinsic motivators, a majority of our learners would/could be responsible for planning their own learning . . . some with more help than others. A “for . . . instance” – Lori was able to do her online learning from anywhere. Were she not responsible and be making acceptable progress, her online learning would take place in a supervised computer lab. Immature learners might meet with their learning coach daily, while the mature learners may meet with their coach once every week or two.

In the spirit of fairness, we are fully aware of how good teachers . . . and that’s most of them . . . bootleg intrinsic motivators into their classrooms all the time. But they do so in spite of the structure of the Industrial Age assembly line, not because of it. These teachers are our heroes and heroines.

The question is a good one. Thanks for sticking with us for a rather lengthy answer. We look forward to talking with you on March 14 when we suspect you will have questions about our answer. (cjs & bmcg)

Attention Technology and Innovation in Education (TIE) Bookstudy Group

Thank your for reading and studying Inevitable: Mass Customized Learning. Bea
McGarvey and I are honored that you are interested in our vision for education
and educators. Let me hear from you with your questions or comments and I will
respond online . . . or, should the questions require lengthy elaboration, I
might make a few comments and then follow up on the question when we can have a
real give and take dialogue.

Mass Customized Learning (MCL) is certainly a paradigm shift . . . no tinkering
allowed. And for sure, it's hard to think OTB when we have spend our whole
lives in school as a learner and teacher. But the rewards are great . . . and
moving something as important as education into the Information Age and student
learning into the age of empowerment is . . . . well, INEVITABLE.

I look forward to our time together on March 14. In the meantime, tis OK to
drop a note to chuckschwahn@yahoo.com or leave a comment on our blog. (cjs)

Chuck and I will be presenting "Inevitable: MCL" at Maine ASCD's Spring Conference on April 8th. It will be held in Portland....a great place to visit. Look for details on their website www.maineascd.org. bmcg.

I have the opportunity to talk to people at the AASA convention about Leadership, Learning Communities, and Mass Customized Learning in Denver on Friday, February 18. Come join Bill Spady and me at 2:30 and listen and learn about our truly transformational vision for public schools. Tis our professions opportunity to leapfrog the Industrial age delivery of student learning opportunities. (cjs)