Are we ready to turn our backs on traditional methods of education, here in the BHSD? Is Fielding-Nair's concept of 21st Century Education a valid, credible option?
Key words: Team Teaching and Collaborative Learning.
Is this best for our students? What will they find when they go to college? Will they be ready to compete on an international stage?
Are we ready to reject the concepts of individual responsibility and accountability?
I am not so sure, and I think we need to be concerned. I am hoping to hear from students and teachers who have received information about upcoming changes to classroom management and operation, team-teaching and collaboration on the parts of students.
If you are a student or employee of the BHSD, please protect your identity, if you wish.
Fielding-Nair International, a virtual architectural consulting firm, was retained in 2009 to help create the plan to renovate a shed used for milking cows into a 10,000 sq. ft., $3-million ediface at the farm.
In October of 2010, Fielding-Nair was awarded a contract for $863,114 to "facilitate" the design/bond passage of the single high school at the Andover site. This contract award, using money from the 2004 sinking fund, was the single offensive board action which inspired the full-board recall attempt that was initiated in 2011.
The board voted 6-0 to award the contract to FNI. David Lubin, who enthusiastically supported this firm's proposal, did not cast a vote.
Fielding-Nair has developed a marketing term, "21st Century Education," and they use this term in presentations to school districts. Essentially, what they propose is that technological and social changes have caused a necessary change in the education process. Students should learn collaboratively and teachers should teach in teams. Schools should be renovated (or re-built) to accommodate such features; and traditional classrooms are just a thing of the past.
Are they?
Here's what I think: Certainly, technology has changed all of our lives. Communication, family life, occupations, retail operations, manufacturing, health care, banking, transportation, record-keeping, entertainment....have all changed, significantly, in the past 20, 30, 40, 50 years.
Our students buy their books on Amazon; not at the book store. They often read books and materials on a computer screen instead of a hard- or soft-bound book. That's quite a change.
What has not changed? Neuro-anatomy has not changed. The process by which the human brain uptakes, comprehends, retains and recalls information has not changed. Teaching methods may be altered, and additional technology may be useful in the classroom, but learning has not really changed.
Recently, some teachers were informed that they would no longer have their own classrooms, and would no longer be able to decorate their own rooms with posters or materials for their studentst to study and enjoy. Some were told that the "new" high school will be paperless, and that all materials on paper should be shredded. Some teachers have been told that they can put educational materials in a large bag and carry it with them, to meet with students, throughout the day.
That may be very cool, and modern, but is it BETTER for our students?
Call me old-fashioned, but one-on-one, or small-group work with a very good teacher can provide the "spark" that ignites that smoldering flame that any average student needs to become a superior student.
A great teacher, who relates well to students and who cares about the future of any student can make a big difference. A little personal attention can go a long way.
What if that great teacher is forced to work as part of a committee?
What happens to that personal attention?
The fact that the BHSD may have a high-tech "Promethian board" or personal electronic devices in every classroom does not change the fact that some students benefit from small class sizes and that some academic subjects require individual, not collective, effort to learn.
Thousands of people signed recall petitions because they did not want to spend sinking fund money on a virtual consultant, and many of those signers were very concerned about the future of education in the BHSD. They were very worried about any educational "experiments" that might be tested on our students.
We've done it before, and the results were not good.
Is FNIs "21st c. education just another expensive fad?
When did collaborative learning a bad thing? My best learning experiences in college (didn't get much in high school) were collaborative. As a team we developed management plans for a National Park, watershed mgt. plans for a National Forest, assessed geologic formations. As a professional, worked with engineers to develop creative storm water drainage and severe erosion solutions. I currently work daily with a team of people who make sure everything is covered and nothing is forgotten. Our students need to know how to work with all sorts of professions in the future. If we neglect to incorporate multiple learning methods in our schools then we will limit our children's (yours, mine and our neighbors) future success. We need to be able to let them be creative along with learning the core curriculum so they can be the Steve Jobs, or the best doctors, lawyers, business owners, teachers, farmers or whatever in the future.
You are on very shaky ground when you talk about finance; you are even shakier ground when you talk about "21st" century curriculum and pedagogy. I find Mr. Moigis and his 7th grade first US school experience in 1957 more compelling here. Your suggestions here are particularly bizarre for parents of students who are thinking of going on to a university education or graduate school. More generally, Elizabeth's first paragraph point to your worrisome habit of thinking only in "either/or" terms. One is either an individual or part of a collective, etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate University education has been collaborative for years. Ask anyone who has been in an MBA program. There is nothing new there. The BHHS building design allows options for teachers and students that are currently not available. For example, if part of a class is ahead and working independently, they would currently go sit in on the floor in the hallway to work. In the new building, they would have chairs, tables, and electrical support.
Dr. Yong Zhao encourages school districts to offer as many choices and opportunities for students so that their individual potential can be nurtured and cultivated. In his professional opinion (which has much more credibility than Ms. Greenwell and Mr. Moigis), the school facility has a tremendous impact on the district’s ability to offer “choice” to the student. As he explained, some teaching settings require large venues, some require small ones, some require significant technology, and some do not. The important thing is to offer choice, because it is the passionate and self confident student that will become successful, not the one that scored the highest on the test. So Ms. Greenwell and Mr. Moigis; who are you to tell my children what they will be passionate about? The two of you may like to live in the past, but please don’t force our children or the rest of the community to. I am not willing to stand by and let you advocate for limiting opportunities for our children. Neither of you possess the qualities of a good school board member.
You should go back and read the discussion that took place on your blog, “Caller: Are you the fiscally sane school board candidate?. FNI didn't create the concept of “21st Century Education” just to sell their services! If they had then why are Cornell, Technion-Israel, Columbia, and the University of Rochester spending millions of dollars building educational spaces that “foster interaction and collaboration”? YES, the concept of 21st Century Education is a valid and credible option for those of us who exist in the world of today and look to the future not the past. We are not discussing the study of the structures of the nervous system (neuroanatomy), and there are many people who's neuroanatomies are different. Additionally, our brains do change throughout life. There is plenty of research on this topic. Man's knowledge about the ways people learn has grown accordingly and therefore teaching methods have changed. Lastly, what the students of today need to learn (knowledge and skills) is very different from students of previous generations. Many of the jobs of yesterday no longer exist and the jobs of tomorrow have yet to be born. That is what 21st Century Education is for. Do a little reading! You should have attended Dr. Yong Zhao’s presentation last night. You might have learned something.
J. Wagner
J. Wagner
Jenny and Vic, how sad that you did not attend Yong Zhao's lecture on Monday night. While we were "in the dark" for most of his important lecture (due to the power outage) we certainly had much light shed on the important topics, (particular the testing craze and the narrowing of curriculum), of today and tomorrow in education. Let's not throw out what is good about new, but rather keep the best of traditional pedagogy and combine it with new styles of learning. Universities today expect students to be familiar with collaborative efforts in project based learning and critical thinking skills to solve problems. Our new high school will provide the best of both the old and the new, giving all students the choices they need to prepare for a successful and fulfilling future.