Regarding Checker's predictions of trends/factors/events that will have a significant impact on the substance and delivery of educational offerings in the next five years (see "The shape of things to come"): I second his insights on the changing nature of teaching and learning. But he neglected to carry them a step further to address the resulting implications for how we define "content" and how we identify, acquire, and regulate the competencies needed to "teach" in the very different kinds of learning environments he described and forecast.
First, the need for and emergence of individualized, technology-rich learning environments are more evident every day. These learning environments have great relevance for the changing needs and varied expectations of students. And, in a practical sense, they can make high quality but very small and individualized learning environments financially feasible anywhere.
Second, the "content" acquired by students in these new environments comes from many more sources than the traditional teacher lecturing from the front of the classroom, supplemented by (what Checker described as) "ten pound textbooks." The "content" in these new learning environments is also more likely to be bundled and organized in ways other than the traditional one-subject-at-a-time. Students may learn content in multiple subjects simultaneously, as they do a project, engage in community service or an internship, or access a variety of on-line information sources.
Third, these new "schools" place greater emphasis on student learning and on fundamentally changing the role of the adults we have historically called "teachers." As Checker noted, the adults in these learning environments are less engaged as "sole sources" or "content experts" and more as "facilitators of student learning."
Finally, this different role for "teachers" calls for fundamentally different ways of preparing adults to work with students. Legislation adopted in Minnesota this week would mandate creation of a new "interdisciplinary teaching license" and a parallel initiative to define the innovative learning environments in which such a license could be applied. This legislation has been supported by a broad coalition of alternative, charter, on-line, and rural educators.
Although the competencies needed to teach in these learning environments are different, they are no less demanding than the subject matter competencies historically used to define "highly qualified teaching." In fact, advocates of the new license in Minnesota contend that teachers who don't possess these different sets of skills are not qualified to work in these different types of schools. Hence these competencies deserve full recognition in the federal/NCLB and state-mandated processes for training and certifying teachers.
The new legislation in Minnesota is just the beginning. To bring this vision into reality, we will need to tackle teacher preparation, create new courses for students, and ramp up research efforts. We must set in motion the codification and legitimization of seismic changes in how teaching and learning are organized and defined that are not just over the horizon but here today.
Jon Schroeder
Education|Evolving,
St. Paul, Minnesota
I met Dr. Finn after his talk at the Association of Educational Publishers conference, where he spoke briefly about the future of American textbooks. I'd like to offer a small publisher's observations on "the mad, mad world of textbook adoption" and other trends.
Davis Publications is a small, high-quality, innovative, multimedia publisher?a 104-year old family business?that specializes in arts education. We have been involved in Texas adoptions since the 1960s.
More than three years ago, we began to prepare for the current Texas fine arts adoption. Our books were adopted by the State Board and in April 2005, we delivered hundreds of thousands of books to the depository?only to have the Legislature fail to appropriate any of the adoption money. We have done in good faith everything the State has asked us, invested millions, devoted countless hours, but we currently have no firm prospect of any return.
What really makes Texas a "mad, mad world" for us is the disconnect between the bureaucracy and the legislature. As far as the Texas Education Agency (TEA) is concerned, we had a "contract" with the state when the books were adopted last November. We met all their requirements and deadlines for sampling, revision, and delivery of finished books. After all this, the Legislature has not seen fit to execute the state's side of the agreement?even though the TEA released hundreds of millions from the Permanent School Fund to pay for this year's adoption (valued by the TEA at $378 million). We are doing our best to make our case, but we get into Texas adoption politics only once or twice a decade, so it is very tough.
The ability to create virtual, flexible resources to enhance, if not replace, the textbook is an ideal, unlikely to be realized for a long time. (See here for news on an attempt to do so in Texas.) It's easy enough to wire schools, but training and maintaining are huge obstacles. We currently offer a number of technology options and want to go further in this direction; however, there is little indication that non-print materials will suddenly take over in the classroom.
In summary, we at Davis realize that the era of state-adoption-driven publishing may be ending, and we're excited about the future?especially one that includes art.
Tom Lucci
Davis Publications
Worcester, Massachusetts