Is the term 21st Century out of date?
Cross posted at Building Understanding.
It began when Tara and I took on the task of articulating our ISB21 curriculum’s standards and benchmarks. I voiced it in a single tweet:
Okay, some background…
Our task is to ensure that the thorough standards from both ISTE and AASL were completely represented, while remaining true to one of our original tenets:
To be a successful curriculum, one that will truly be part of students’ educational experience, it must be accessible to teachers.
This was very important to Justin and I as we began to develop our ideas and remained important as the whole ISB21 team as each member joined the conversation. Eventually, ISTE and AASL caught up with us and now its a matter of fitting their great work into our original framework. But the premise remains. Past models – the best they could be in their time – generally failed because teachers did not believe it was their job to teach technology.
Now, of course, we realize that technology is merely part of a much bigger conversation about Communication, Collaboration, Innovation, and Thinking. Online conversations, articles, video mash-ups, and tweets emerge constantly extolling the virtues of a 21st Century Curriculum for 21st Century Learners. I know…I’ve posted a lot of them. And we have plenty of credible backing – take ISTE, AASL, Howard Gardner’s Five Minds for the Future, or the IB Learner Profile to name a few. They all tell us what we want our kids to turn out like. They all remind us what we need to value in education.
But we don’t.
At least not in action. (GENERALIZATION ALERT:) Schools continue to push content-driven curricula. Teachers continue to plan lessons building expertise within the discipline. And if students get our “21st Century Skills”, it’s because of an exception-to-the-rule teacher, choices the students make outside of class, or just plain luck.
We all know that what we need is buy-in. We see the success stories, celebrate the schools that do it, and ultimately wonder, what does it take to make it work everywhere? Buy-in.
So back to the teacher accessibility issue.
How do we ensure that teachers see teaching a 21st Century Curriculum as part of their job?
Our way has been to remind teachers that they have ALWAYS valued effective communication, collaboration, innovation, and thinking in their students. Only the media and the degree to which each is possible have changed.
How we communicate, collaborate, innovate, and think IS different. Or rather, it can be different. We still need the ways of the past, but have added ever-changing/growing ways of the present and future. This is the core principle of our 21st Century Skills. They are actually 20th Century skills, maybe even 18th Century skills, only they use and will continue to use 21st Century tools.
So how do we build a real and enduring understanding of this?
Half our problem may be the terminology. On the blogosphere (or is it “in” the blogosphere?), we all know what it means when we say “21st Century”. It comes embedded with all sorts of extra implications, meanings, connotations, and suggestions. We understand it, because we’ve read blog posts that converted us, seen videos that shift our understanding, conversed with global colleagues that re-shape and/or affirm our thinking, and joined 100-comment conversations that engaged us so much that we changed the very way we perceived the world, the learner, and our role in education.
But does everyone else get all that when they hear “21st Century skills”? How could they? They lack our experiences and our scaffolding. Not only does it fail to carry the same perspective-shifting connotation, but at worse, may even send a message of “you neither value how I learned nor how I teach. You are telling me that what I value is not valuable.”
Perhaps that is an extreme view, but it may not be far from the truth. In our efforts to spread the gospel, we do our best to explain the significance, but if we want buy-in, let’s remember our audience. Let’s tap into what our educators already buy into. They are professional, care about kids, and want their students to succeed. They understand and value good communication, critical thinking, and collaboration.
Don’t put them off with catch phrases and “excluding” words. (why do we do that , by the way…blog, wiki, tweet, glog, vlog, apps…are we trying to confuse everyone?)
Instead, remind them, it’s about adapting what they already value to a world that requires new ways to do them. Remind yourselves that your teachers have ALWAYS been trying to prepare their students to succeed in the world they will live in. And then collaborate with them on how that world has changed.
As for what we call it instead. I’m open to suggestions.
Stay tuned.
Image, Future or Bust, by Vermin Inc
Image, Into the future but now without the past, by janusz l
Jeff,
This is one of those posts that I just can’t help but think is going to be an important and enduring one.
I think there are so many of us who just assume that most educators are familiar with the terminology, but are just choosing to not use it. That is simply not the case. I think by using exclusive terminology we are sending the message that we think we are better than the teachers who have embraced a new way of doing things.
I think you hit the nail on the head with the idea of remembering our audience when we are trying to get a buy-in. In my opinion it is about providing examples to teachers about how to use the different tools for collaborating, communicating, and promoting critical thinking. The tools will come and go, but these are timeless skills that will always be taught.
I hope your post leads to a healthy discussion. This post is reminiscent of what blogging used to be about before so many jumped ship and went to Twitter. Thanks for bringing it back.
@Beth, thank you for your comment and compliments. I am currently struggling to define the level of specificity of the benchmark examples for grade levels in our standards. Are examples enough or does our audience need “just tell me what to do”?
Ps. I am one of the guest authors on UTechTips and work with Jeff. This was my post.
Dennis,
My apologies for trying to credit Jeff with your work. I stand by what I said last night- this just might be one of those important posts that actually sparks a conversation. It has been retweeted over 225 times now and half of North America is not even awake yet.
Thanks, Beth. I continue to be humbled/shocked at the spread of this post. Over 500 retweets?! Thanks for getting the ball rolling. As for mistaking me for Jeff, that is hardly a bad thing…he is a star.
I found your post by following a twitter stream. I’m glad I did.
My take is that “21st century” has the same problems as other abstractions that seem to point to realities but are in fact phrases that seem to clarify, but in fact obfuscate.
What does America, or any other country name, point to? Is it the cities,the rural areas, the northeast, the southwest? With our new ability to see more from sub national communities the old labels may have lost their utility.
There is much talk about #education. But the texture of real life is lost at that level of abstraction. An education enterprise, like any enterprise, moves in “twitter time”, organizational time, and most important “student time.” The interweaving of those different times within the constraints of space are what are most important in understanding any century and every enterprise.
Just wanted to add a thought about “buy-in” My thought is that new tools are quickly adopted when they save time. I think if there were a single metric to judge tech adoption it might help.
The metric is “does it save teacher time or does it waste teacher time. If yes do it. If not, save it for later or tinker with the implementation until it does.
MichaelJ,
Thanks for finding your way here. Twitter has its uses! Regarding your thoughts on getting “buy-in”, I think we cannot rely solely on whether it will save teacher’s time. I get the efficiency piece, but I believe that our ideals should be loftier and we need to be able to demonstrate that these tools provide necessary learning that simply COULD NOT happen without the tools.
Students must be given the opportunity to think and learn and collaborate and communicate in environments that agree with the world they live in, rather than the one we lived in.
It’s time students learn with technology the way they live with technology. And our job is to convince teachers that a) this learning is essential and b) that it is their job to help kids get there.
Thanks for being part of this conversation!
Jeff,
It seems to me is that teachers actually do not have be convinced “that a) this learning is essential and b) that it is their job to help kids get there.”
The kids will use all the new social media merely by eliminating the barriers. It’s the teachers and most especially the admins who must learn how to manage their use to minimize disruption, fear of lawsuits and losing control of the conversation.
As I read your post, it said to me that most teachers are deeply satisfied by helping students learn. The problem I’ve observed is that they need help in managing their time to be able to do it with the best tools available. If the time cost of using a new tool is greater than the time saved, buy in will slow to a crawl.
The typical response I’ve heard on the ground is “Sounds great. I would love to try it. But who has the time, between meetings, creating tests and lesson plans, etc etc etc.”
To me it’s a bit like any software trying to convince potential users why it’s good. What seems to be the new paradigm is “try it, you’ll like it.” No one had to convince users that Google, Facebook, nings or Twitter were worth doing.
The first impression is critical. Step one is to get teachers to try one. Step one is also to make sure they like it from day one.
@MichaelJ
Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Michael.
Here are my one and half cents…
Like any best practice, I believe that if teachers recognize the potential for better and/or valued learning coming from a new tool or environment, then they will take it on. It is my experience with the teachers I work with that they will put in the time if they see that payoff. Maybe that’s the bang for the buck you alluded to.
While I, too, hear the “who has the time” comments, teachers passion for their objective – student learning – will convince them to use technology in the same way it might convince them to try visible thinking routines or authentic assessment. If there is valued learning to be had, it’ll be worth doing.
Too idealistic?
It isn’t a cost comparison of time spent learning vs time saved using.
I think it’s more learning improvement possible vs time lost learning it.
People didn’t need convincing about Facebook and Google b/c better “connecting” and “searching” are happening with those tools…not just time saving, but quality too.
That can be true of learning in the context of providing global audience and worldwide collaboration. If teachers value that (that’s the hard part) then the tools and methods will sell themselves.
Yes, but I guess I do think that it’s too idealistic, and it doesn’t need to be.
Passion only works for early adopters and evangelists. That would be me and probably most of the people at Educhat +. A good and even necessary first step.
For me the issue is to make massive changes much much faster, rather than slower. Every day’s delay means another cohort of bottom of the pyramid high schools kids are going to have an preventably complicated life.
I guess I may be the real wild-eyed optimist. An under appreciated fact is that most people most of the time make decisions on minimizing risk and effort, not on being better. I know it may sound not nice, but after all my twitter name is ToughLoveforX.
It’s really not as bad as it might sound. But, once one faces the fact straight on, I think that all the pieces are just about ready to make this happen.
Hi Dennis,
I too found this post via Twitter. I am coordinating a 1:1 laptop program gr4-12 in Indonesia at Sinarmas World Academy. This is a topic that has been of much interest to me over the past few years. I have been completing and Masters in Education Technology online from Australia (whilst living and teaching in Indonesia). I would like to try to define 21st Century education as the following;
’21st Century teaching and learning does not simply incorporate learning technologies into current educational approaches, but rather challenges fundamental views about effective teaching and learning.’ I am fortunate to be working in a school that is heavily technology based with heaps of support. My only problem is (I have the Integrator role) getting around and helping all the teachers that need my assistance to ‘make it work’. Actually I’m on to a winning formula – I have a team of tech savvy students trained up to help – they have even lead workshops for teachers. Now that’s 21st Century!
You’re right Dennis. Buy in is the key to making all of this meaningful. These new ways of learning need to be modelled in our schools; innovative teachers who are making connective learning experiences possible need to be fostered and encouraged. Our educational leaders need to be noticing what people are doing and give their staff adequate time to engage in networks that facilitate support for teachers and enable the connections that make new ways of learning possible. We’re about to hit 2010. It’s time we left the 21st Century learning tag behind us. The only new thing about what it is we are doing is that we are using the technology to avail us of opportunities that weren’t possible before. Good teachers have always looked for ways to extend their students and make the learning real. You said it with this; “They are professional, care about kids, and want their students to succeed. They understand and value good communication, critical thinking, and collaboration.” Yep, they do. They just need to get a handle on new ways of doing just that. Thanks for the post. Very well put.
Dennis-
Regarding the buy in: This made me think of a recent workshop I was at- I was given 10 minutes to talk about integrating technology into an art curriculum (interesting challenge- that’s another conversation) – but when I talked about creating a PLN, I asked how many teachers had a facebook profile. A few sheepishly looked around and slowly raised their hands- one asked “you’re going to make us admit to it?”… after a few ‘broke the ice’ almost everyone more raised their hands.
This made me realize that there is a challenge here beyond ‘buy in’ – its a challenge of acceptance, and reasonably so. We want to engender communication in an entirely new framework, but that framework is seen by many adults as more akin to ‘hanging out at the mall’ than ’school’. Makes it kind of hard to, as you say, help the kids succeed in the world in which they live.
I like this joke I heard on Bill Maher’s podcast recently- however, it also made me think about how ‘the mainstream’ views what we refer to as (for better or worse) “21st Century Skills”:
“And who put the idea of ‘Death Panels’ in their heads? Sarah Palin, who has settled in to her job very well, an unemployed right-wing blogger. Apparently Sarah Palin quit her job as Governor of Alaska to spend more time on Facebook. I’m serious. She’s on Facebook every day now. Because this is the proper forum to confront the President of the United States on the most important issue of our day, a social networking site for teenagers.” –Bill Maher??
David,
Any thoughts about what might have happened in that presentation if you had them all in a computer room, and said,
“I would like you to go to twitter, create an account, the find #edchat, then RT the stuff that you find interesting.”
My bet is that they would do it. The problem with a facebook account is that you have to be very thoughtful about what you reveal about yourself. That requires thought. Thought requires time.
The neat thing about twitter is that like a public square, you can assume a persona, look around and send out your 140 characters whenever you are in the mood.
It actually has much less “friction” than facebook, or wiki’s or nings. To belabor a point I made above, it takes much less time. Not just physical time, but cognitive time deciding how we have to present ourselves to the world.
Well, sure! That would have been better- but my point wasn’t about the practicality of my presentation (it wasn’t practical at all, but I didn’t get to set the parameters), it was simply explaining my perception of resistance vs. ‘buy in’.
I’m not exactly sure what you mean by ‘friction’ – I see twitter as having a similar ‘buy in’ problem in the ‘mainstream’ as facebook. Just as an example, a friend of mine, who i believe is a role model of using technology in the classroom, also makes fun of me for ‘twittering’, so there is some ’social stigma’ there in for educators as well.
Perhaps that’s articulated in this animation here (if you haven’t seen it yet, its pretty funny).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5Ff2X_3P_4
If I’m not being clear, I’m not challenging the use of the climbing tools, I’m questioning the height of the mountain.
Thanks for the conversation.
Just a short reply to try to clarify the points I’m trying to make.
The problem is how to scale from evangelists to point where social media is just the “new normal.” The success of #educhat alone demonstrates their is a global presence of evangelists. I think it’s far to say that the real number yet to be indentified may be as much as 100 times as the number on #educhat. But given the scale of the problem, that’s a tiny amount.
For non evangelists, people who are just trying to their job and have a nice day, the value proposition has to change.
The very fact that they are not evangelists demonstrate(2me) that they are not going to change behavior because of beliefs.
They will change behaviors by first engaging. Then seeing a proximate improvement in the work lives. Once that happens, “buy in” has a chance to go viral.
Thanks for the Clarification, I think we’re on the same page- the question then, is how do we reach that ‘tipping point’?
I thought we would be on the same page.
My answer (in 140 characters or less).
Stop evangelizing. Focus on supporting evangelists.Keep making it easier and eaiser to get started.”
@Jane
Terima Kasih! I used to live in Indonesia… it’ll always have a place in my heart. You have a great project in your hands good luck.
I don’t disagree with your definition. We all have versions of that embedded in our own thinking. And kids as experts/teachers is awesome and SO 21st Century.
My point is that I don’t think everyone else gets that. They just hear “NEW” when they hear 21st Century. Not necessarily better, more suited to a changing world, or powerful – just “new”. And that is hurting our cause.
@Jenny
How come it always takes me pages of writing to say what you can say in a paragraph long comment? As always, you nail it.
@David
No doubt the perception is there… “silly rabbit, Trix are for kids.”
That’s why our focus has to be on what learning we value. Then when teachers agree on that value and the need for change in teaching to match changes in the world (the hard part), the tools and tech will be there with an obvious usefulness.
Side note: love Bill Maher. Really want to watch all of Religulous…looks amazing.
Yeah… “Religulous” was a bit of a let down for me. It wasn’t as spontaneous as his shows are, and he didn’t really take on any big challenges in the film – its fun only in a kind of ’shooting fish in a barrel’ kind of way
Holy smokes!
(that may be all I’m able to say…okay, maybe not)
I am stunned by how this post has been pushed out there. I knew I was getting great audience by cross posting this on UTechTips, but I had no idea the energy this post would take on. Thanks to all who’ve retweeted…it is inspiring to consider that so many have read something I had to say.
In particular, thanks to the commenters above, for making this a conversation…which was kind of the point. I hope many other conversations happened out there off of this post, but about the ideas.
I will most likely never hit this mark again, but regardless, you have all inspired me to keep doing this. Love that chords are being struck.
Yeah, who knew the columns would get that thin?
Good topic. Thanks for the conversation.
Jeff,
I’ve had this post open on FireFox since you announced it on Twitter, funny how busy life gets.
As I read it I was reminded of the ‘Brave New World Wide Web’ video I created a while back. It was well received… by the ‘converted’. It spoke to those that have engaged online and in the blogosphere, but I don’t think it ’spoke’ to someone new to these ideas.
21st Century Skills?
If you break down the skills themselves you get down to things like:
‘Checking the reliability of your sources’
and
‘Use information accurately and creatively to solve a problem’
and
‘Respect cultural differences and work effectively with people from a range of social and cultural backgrounds’
If you really think about it, those skills would have been quite useful in the 20th Century too.
I think we need to drop the term 21 Century and focus on Learning Skills.
The reality is that the world wide web is an incredible source of information and ‘Checking the reliability of your sources’ means understanding how to use the web knowledgeably and meaningfully.
We don’t need a new term. We need to focus on what Learning Skills our students need to be successful, and then ask:
“What does a student today need in their repertoire in order to achieve these Learning Skills?”… which begs the questions,
“What do I need to know as an educator in order to provide those skills to my students?”
So, what exactly is the discussion that we need to be having?
What skills do teachers need to be effective?
I’m currently at a school with very little tech and what I’m advocating for is 1-1 for teachers: Ever teacher with a netbook and an LCD projector. Until they, the teachers, have the skills to use technology effectively, the internet is a glorified encyclopedia with a few interesting videos and a few interesting distractions… and we, (those that will actually read your post), know it is far more than that!
David,
Strong points. But, I wonder if the focus is not tech at all. But rather to use whatever tools are at hand to help teachers become the skeptical, active learners that we want our students to be.
That’s a good point, I agree with you in that ‘Learning Skills’ is a tech-neutral phrase.
However, I see an LCD projector as the minimum blackboard or whiteboard or overhead projector requirement of the modern day classroom. We are living in a technicolour world and teaching kids in Black & White… and that’s why I am taking the tech focus approach, in a school that I think needs it.
\\\\New Post:\"Is the term 21st Century out of date?\" – http://bit.ly/12QLDp from Dennis Harter\\\\\"Quote
RT @web20classroom: Good blogpost question for IT in schools – Is the term 21st Century out of date? | U Tech Tips, http://bit.ly/tDUh6Quote
Is the term 21st Century out of date? http://bit.ly/4C5PnQuote
http://bit.ly/6o1k1 great blog postQuote
@ teach42 Hellow from Scottsbluff, Nebraska. Want to share my new favorite blog post. http://bit.ly/lyDfJ Enjoy your day!Quote
RT @bethstill: @ teach42 Hellow from Scottsbluff, Nebraska. Want to share my new favorite blog post. http://bit.ly/lyDfJ Enjoy your day!Quote
RT @web20classroom: Reading: "Is the term 21st Century out of date? | U Tech Tips" ( http://bit.ly/tDUh6 )Quote
RT @dharter: Over 570 RTs for my post Is the term 21st Century out of date? http://bit.ly/4C5Pn Amazing!Quote
Kudos to .@dharter for his post on U Tech Tips http://bit.ly/6o1k1 "Is the term 21st Century out of date?"Quote
Do you agree or disagree with http://is.gd/4KgBl posting about 21st century skills?Quote
Is the term 21st Century out of date? http://bit.ly/4C5PnQuote