
Ask HN: Why is there so little innovation in education? - ggordan
At the moment, the biggest VLE(Virtual Learning Environment), which is used by a large number of universities, is BlackBoard. And yet the product is poor by todays standards.<p>There are a lot of new startups that are concentrating on creating 'fashionable' companies, usually social networks of some kind, and yet the  education sector is constantly being overlooked.<p>So perhaps a better question would be, are there any new startups addressing this problem?<p>Note: I also posted this question on Quora, but it got 1 reply which didn't really answer the question.
======
patio11
Education sales combines all the wonderful fun of multi-year Big Freaking
Enterprise consultative sales cycles with the vast untapped budget of your
local pizza shop. Your product, if it is going to be effective, is virtually
certain to threaten the continued employment of a stakeholder who has veto
authority over deploying it. Educational institutions and educators are not
rewarded for doing education well -- indeed, if they have greater than minimal
competency, improving just gets their budgets cut.

~~~
Retric
Add to that Blackboard has a large patent portfolio and uses it to defend it's
self vigorously.

~~~
DevX101
You have any examples of them starting legal action based on their patents?

They have a "patent pledge" not to prosecute if you implement Open Source
software, even if it's integrated w/ propretary software to some extent.
<http://www.blackboard.com/Company/Patents/Patent-Pledge.aspx>

I'd love to know how broad this pledge is based on their actual past actions.

~~~
ZeroGravitas
It doesn't really matter, the patent they used to sue Desire2Learn got
invalidated last year as part of the legal battle and a couple of weeks ago
Blackboard announced they were abandoning their appeal:

[http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/blackboard-drops-
appe...](http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/blackboard-drops-appeals-on-
software-patent/28494)

------
IsaacL
It's interesting you should bring this up, because I've thought a few times
about trying to start an Education-based company after I graduate - it's
something I'm both interested in and passionate about (several family members
are teachers and headteachers, I've worked as an EFL teacher twice).

One thing that puts me off is what patio11 mentions - selling to schools and
universities would be difficult and it's unclear whether they actually want
it. OTOH, it does seem like a lot of individuals in education are interested
in the potential of e-learning (to give their institution a USP if nothing
else), though I've been uninspired by a lot of the examples of it I've seen in
practice.

One area which does see a lot of fashionable, Techcrunch-y startups is
language learning - off the top of my head I can name Busuu, italki, and
Voxswap which are language-learning social networks, ChinesePod and Skritter
which are targeted at Mandarin learners, and Smart.fm and YC-funded Lingt
which offer online flashcards. These, of course, are more aimed at
individuals, suggesting that it's something much easier to target.

"Disrupting Education" is an interesting read; the author's thesis is that
e-learning is a 'disruptive innovation', that will first find success in niche
areas where traditional education cannot reach (for example, providing high
school students courses like Arabic, which are difficult to find teachers
for). There it will gain momentum until it begins to displace more traditional
education (though he holds that it will empower human teachers, not replace
them).

~~~
nwinter
At Skritter, we spent a lot of effort trying to sell to schools. In the
process, individual sales picked up on their own to the point where we
realized we were wasting our time on the schools.

It's not that it can't be done. If you can directly make or save the school
money, you can do it. But don't just try to help it teach better. Very few
will pay for that.

------
shawndumas
Steven Jobs says:

"I used to think that technology could help education. I've probably
spearheaded giving away more computer equipment to schools than anybody else
on the planet. But I've had to come to the inevitable conclusion that the
problem is not one that technology can hope to solve. What's wrong with
education cannot be fixed with technology. No amount of technology will make a
dent.

It's a political problem. The problems are sociopolitical. The problems are
unions. You plot the growth of the NEA [National Education Association] and
the dropping of SAT scores, and they're inversely proportional. The problems
are unions in the schools. The problem is bureaucracy. I'm one of these people
who believes the best thing we could ever do is go to the full voucher system.

I have a 17-year-old daughter who went to a private school for a few years
before high school. This private school is the best school I've seen in my
life. It was judged one of the 100 best schools in America. It was phenomenal.
The tuition was $5,500 a year, which is a lot of money for most parents. But
the teachers were paid less than public school teachers - so it's not about
money at the teacher level. I asked the state treasurer that year what
California pays on average to send kids to school, and I believe it was
$4,400. While there are not many parents who could come up with $5,500 a year,
there are many who could come up with $1,000 a year.

If we gave vouchers to parents for $4,400 a year, schools would be starting
right and left. People would get out of college and say, "Let's start a
school." You could have a track at Stanford within the MBA program on how to
be the businessperson of a school. And that MBA would get together with
somebody else, and they'd start schools. And you'd have these young,
idealistic people starting schools, working for pennies.

They'd do it because they'd be able to set the curriculum. When you have kids
you think, What exactly do I want them to learn? Most of the stuff they study
in school is completely useless. But some incredibly valuable things you don't
learn until you're older - yet you could learn them when you're younger. And
you start to think, What would I do if I set a curriculum for a school?

God, how exciting that could be! But you can't do it today. You'd be crazy to
work in a school today. You don't get to do what you want. You don't get to
pick your books, your curriculum. You get to teach one narrow specialization.
Who would ever want to do that?

These are the solutions to our problems in education. Unfortunately,
technology isn't it. You're not going to solve the problems by putting all
knowledge onto CD-ROMs. We can put a Web site in every school - none of this
is bad. It's bad only if it lulls us into thinking we're doing something to
solve the problem with education.

Lincoln did not have a Web site at the log cabin where his parents home-
schooled him, and he turned out pretty interesting. Historical precedent shows
that we can turn out amazing human beings without technology. Precedent also
shows that we can turn out very uninteresting human beings with technology.

It's not as simple as you think when you're in your 20s - that technology's
going to change the world. In some ways it will, in some ways it won't." [1]

\----

[1]: <http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.02/jobs_pr.html>

~~~
revorad
He made some good points, but even a visionary like Jobs missed how his
prediction of networked computers would help improve education. Once again, I
point to the Khan Academy.

If all Salman Khan had was a log cabin, he would have probably still taught
because it's his passion. But he would only touch the lives of a few hundred
at most, not millions.

The same applies for the top universities making their content available for
free online. Do people really not see what it means to students outside
America and Europe?

With age, even Jobs got jaded and forgot his own golden words: STAY HUNGRY,
STAY FOOLISH.

~~~
shawndumas
I see Khan Academy as disruptive technology and not apart of the education
system. In fact I use Khan in homeschooling. But the real issue that is
stifling eduction _is_ the current eduction system.

~~~
revorad
Khan Academy is not disruptive technology (at least not yet). It is great
teaching material delivered on Youtube, which is the disruptive technology.

------
codejoust
I've been homeschooled, and have taken online classes. With the internet, from
Wikipedia to small websites on a certain topic, the internet has made research
and homeschooling much easier. Yes, I still did use textbooks and read, but
the internet itself has been a great learning environment to pursue at your
own pace. Some of the learning management software I've used improved over
time. Often, most of the learning management software was Moodle with a wimba
classroom. The wimba classroom was not quite so good, but Moodle (despite
being spotty at times) worked well for its purpose. With the Pearson network,
they're running a custom system that technologically is different (webobjects
and asp), however it isn't too distracting to show flash presentations, submit
assignments for grading, run discussions, etc. If someone comes along and
makes a great OSS or SAS solution for a learning management system there is
certainly room to improve. The difference between my experience is the cost is
a concern to those using these programs so they try to find the best and
lowest cost solution.

~~~
inovica
Very interesting to hear from someone who was homeschooled. I currently have
my two children (4 and 8) in a private school here in the UK but my wife and I
said it would be great to give them a different type of education rather than
what is traditional (we're non-conformists anyway!). How did you find the
social aspect, or did your parents deliberately engage you with others?

~~~
codejoust
As high school continued I did more social stuff such as Sports (Non-school
affiliated teams or homeschool teams), Co-Op classes for a year, Taking
classes at a community college later in high school, Homeschool
extracurriculars: Mock Trial, Government Camp. When I was younger, I did field
trips and events with a local homeschool group. Other stuff too like youth
group, summer camps, etc.

------
mashmac2
Moodle is another interesting option. I know a few schools that are using it,
and it certainly has some fan support:

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FUrhl974wSE>

(I recognize it's not a massively innovative product compared to Blackboard,
but I do prefer it. It's a step in the right direction.)

------
narrator
The most unpleasant fact about the education business is what to do with the
not so bright kids and how to keep them from holding back the bright kids.
(Yes I know, all children are above average and are fully capable of
absolutely anything if they just try)

~~~
eru
It's probably more about motivation. Not-so-bright but enthusiastic kids
probably won't hold you back as much as apathetic children.

------
cicero
I worked for a year as a software developer at a company that made educational
products. In many ways it was a good company, but I was frustrated by what I
considered substandard quality in their software products. It wasn't that they
didn't care at all about quality, but the nature of the education market
tended to encourage us to cut corners on quality.

Most educational software is used by students and teachers, but purchased by
administrators. The administrators making the buying decisions compare
competing products according to price and feature lists. Therefore, we were
encouraged to match and exceed the feature count of the competition in order
to get sales. If the new features introduced a few bugs or made the user
interface awkward, that was less of a problem than not getting the features
out in time for the academic year buying cycle. The buyers might never use the
product enough to experience the problems. Other commercial software
developers have similar struggles with the balance of more features, meeting
market windows, and maintaining good design and quality. However, I believe
this problem is exacerbated in the educational market by the gulf that
separates those who buy from those who use the software.

------
andrewce
The reason there is not as much innovation in education is fairly simple:

The people doing the innovating rarely feel the pain points, and the people
doing the decision-making rarely feel the pain points.

To make this more concrete, those who are in decision-making positions are
administrators (who are concerned with teaching on a macro level and on an
"are all the boxes in this curriculum guide getting checked off?"), school
board members (who are rarely in classrooms), and legislators (who only go
into classrooms when it's politically expedient).

Any type of "innovation" comes down from on high based on perceived problems
rather than actual problems.

In the meantime, you've got lots of teachers in the trenches, some of whom are
luddites, but most of whom are willing to try something new, particularly if
it makes their job easier or more effective.

I got in trouble (when I was teaching) for using an online gradebook rather
than a paper gradebook because my principal had less control over it. When
using technology, the mantra was "Why don't you just have them make a
powerpoint?"

If you want real innovation in educational technology, it'll have to either
come from the teachers, or it'll have to come from people who work closely
with teachers. From there, you'll have to sell it to administrators (in order
to even begin to make money), while teachers (at least in my experience)
generally do a pretty good job of evangelizing improvements to those who are
still willing to improve (which, I think, is more than it sometimes seems, but
fewer than perhaps there should be).

TL;DR: there's no innovation because current products either create more pain-
points than they solve, or they don't solve any relevant pain points that the
people using them actually have.

------
elvirs
I have been working on two projects targeting university niche and after
months these are my observations. Universities are managed like kingdoms, not
republics. The deans and professors have absolute power, students do not get a
say. Even if students could rise their voices they prefer not to rise their
voice as their degree (and parents' money) are on the line. Professors and
deans like to keep things run the old way, everything with pen on paper. The
less technology involved the more they enjoy their life. (I think this is
because these guys are mainly 50+ and those types do not like to scratch
things they've known for 30 years and learn new technological stuff)
Technology makes things more transparent and more data available to people
that university thinks should not be. I think technological innovation will
start to boost in universities in like 20 years when students of my age who
enjoys technology in every bit of their life become professors and deans, etc.

~~~
briangreen
I prefer my students do their assignments on paper because its a lot easier to
grade. I have yet to see an online method that works as easily as paper -- I
have often though about developing my own but have not had the time. One
example, you give an online test or exam, you have to click about 50 times to
get through all the essay questions, and then you still have to get the grades
into some other system since many of them can't import/export a standard
format. And if those essays are homework and a student turns it in late, you
get to the end of the semester and the student asks why you didnt give them
credit; they have to notify you they did the assignment after the due date,
otherwise you wont know its completed. The alternative is checking all your
assignments online periodically to see if any new submissions are posted from
previouse assignments. I know this sounds like its not a big deal, but
multiply these frustrations by 120 students, and you start to get an idea that
its not as simple as you make it out to be.

I think one innovation that might make this easier is standardizing of test
formats in XML, so they can easily be migrated between platforms.
Standardizing grade sheets might help too, so when you start using one system
you are not locked in. I have tests in one online system that I do not care
for, but to migrate to Moodle I have to rewrite everything from scratch.

The bottom line is that whether your students use pen and paper, fancy online
systems like Moodle etc, learning does not change much. Students still need to
learn, and professors still need to asses them in basically the same way. If
technology does not offer some advantage that can't be replicated with "stone
knives and bear skins" you gain nothing and its difficult to justify moving to
technology.

~~~
eru
> And if those essays are homework and a student turns it in late, you get to
> the end of the semester and the student asks why you didnt give them credit;
> they have to notify you they did the assignment after the due date,
> otherwise you wont know its completed. The alternative is checking all your
> assignments online periodically to see if any new submissions are posted
> from previouse assignments. I know this sounds like its not a big deal, but
> multiply these frustrations by 120 students, and you start to get an idea
> that its not as simple as you make it out to be.

Isn't the right thing, just to mechanically enforce due dates without excuses
or exceptions? Students tend to procrastinate enough already.

------
glen
We are addressing the problem with www.nixty.com. We launched in July. There
is definitely a lot of opportunity here. There are also a lot of challenges in
addressing this market. If interested shoot me an email glen at nixty dot com.
I'd be happy to talk more with you about this space and share what we've
learned in the process. Also, if you are interested, here is an overview video
of what we are doing: <http://www.youtube.com/user/NIXTYLearning>. Here is
another video - an interview with Scoble -- it is more of a high-level sketch
of where we see things going (more emphasis on research-backed open courseware
etc.): <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YfuDRlUp3AU>

------
guynamedloren
There is a huge underlying theme in the comments here that innovative
technology will not be a silver bullet for the education system - and I agree.
What is being vastly overlooked, however, is that technology can be an
external factor that drives internal innovation. If a technology was developed
that rips apart the current system and causes it to fail (more so than it
already is), I think somebody will eventually catch on and say something like,
"Hey, our system isn't working. Solutions are readily available and can be
downloaded in less than a minute. Every single student has every solution to
every homework problem and every exam that we administer. I think we might
have to try something new."

And that's where the innovation happens.

------
trizk
<http://www.khanacademy.org/> (no affiliation)

------
michaelhart
I'm working on a project now that will aggregate self-motivated learning
online. Watch a lecture on YouTube? (Many universities post them). Get credit
for it. Start a discussion with others who also watched it. Ask and answer
questions. Find like-minded people and learn with each other, set your own
challenges and goals.

That's only half of it, but the core idea is this: We learn online already.
Pave the cowpaths. Give people credit for what they already do.

I'm also looking for a co-founder. Anyone interested in this project
(suggestions, more info, etc.), I'd love to chat: <http://scr.im/michaelhart>

------
revorad
Better content and teachers have greater leverage than technology in
education. The perfect example is Khan Academy, who are only now building
applications for exercises based on their stellar content. If a startup did
want to help, it could help great teachers leverage and amplify the power of
existing tools to create and spread good content.

A few startups are trying to use games as a new way of teaching. There are
lots of language learning sites, which are using peer-to-peer tools, but they
seem more interested in plastering their sites with ads than actually
educating people.

~~~
Egregore
Can you point to some examples of startups trying to use games as a new way of
teaching?

------
kaptainlange
A friend of mine started <http://hootcourse.com/> which attempts to integrate
the communication tools students are using with their courses.

The instructors and students using it thus far seem to enjoy it. Though it's
not a replacement for products like Blackboard since it's not really a
repository for content, it does replace their poor communication tools well.

------
tgriesser
Open source, Java based "Sakai" <http://sakaiproject.org/> has replaced
Blackboard at Wake Forest University, which is encouraging to see...although I
have heard some complaints that it is difficult to learn to use for
professors, even among those who consider themselves above the average
technologically.

I think that the biggest problem preventing the innovation of this sector is
definitely the bureaucracy as other comments have pointed out. The amount of
time and effort that startups put into their products just isn't worth the
number of headaches that come along with the target market.

Also, the education environment does not fit well with the "launch early,
often" model that many startups employ. When evaluating options, they really
want something that is 100% polished and deploy-able, which requires a level
of airtight that most startups are not shooting for.

Building something for the university environment is sort of like enterprise
but worse, because there aren't immediate effects to the "bottom line" when
bad choices are made.

------
vannevar
There are lots of symptoms and consequences, but the core reason is the simple
fact that people don't want their child to be put at a disadvantage;
consequently they are reluctant to a) experiment on their own child with an
innovative program, for fear it will disadvantage them or b) allow others to
experiment with innovations that their own child does not have access to, for
fear it will give the others an advantage.

For a public school to innovate requires them to first overcome a) by showing
clear evidence that the innovation really works (not easy when you're talking
about educational programs that take years to bear fruit), then overcome b) by
implementing the innovation broadly enough for everyone to participate
(generally much too expensive for the community to support). All the other
usual scapegoats (unions, standard tests, Texas textbook companies) are
marginal influences compared to this pervasive feature of human nature. As
usual, we have met the enemy and he is us.

------
alexwestholm
I noticed this recently, developed a concept that I thought might be a good
substitute for some prolific higher ed software and pitched it. The result:
"Great idea! But we've got no funding? We'd love to use it though... maybe you
could sell it to our current vendor and they could bundle it in? We definitely
couldn't afford to pay for it ourselves though."

------
inovica
Having two young children I would love to see something happen in this space.
Currently I have my children in a private school on the basis that its "the
best I can do for them now" - ie small class sizes, larger resources than a
normal school. Whilst this is working out 'ok' I do feel that the idea of
teaching children in a traditional manner - ie knowledge transfer from a
person at the front - is wasteful. Outside of school I try to get them to
solve problems by discovering their own solutions. I've looked at home
schooling, but they would lose the social aspect. Its an area I'm just
starting to explore, to find "a better way" so would welcome any comments,
ideas, sites etc that people know of for an alternative way to traditional
schooling. I do understand this is slightly different to the topic that has
been started, but it still fits within the same area - that of innovation

~~~
kongqiu
Have you considered a Montessori?

~~~
inovica
Yes, this is something we looked into but unfortunately where we live there is
no Montessori locally (within an hour from what I remember from our search).
Thanks for the suggestion though

------
theo10
I've used at least 2 VLEs but I have to say that I still rather use Yahoo
Groups or the best one would be Google Wave... But, yeah, I totally agree that
the environments available nowadays doesn't show any evolution. I think that's
a reflection of the institutions (universities, in general) they are linked
with. Both the education and the working processes have to undergo huge
transformation/evolution (theoretically it should have started by education,
but I can't see it happening). We still pretty much have been going to school
more or less the same for the past 700 years. If we want to be in the 21st
century, we must move on from the 13th.

------
rhhfla
I think you underestimate the innovation in education considering Kahn
Academy, the UN, MIT courseware online, etc. The innovation is in content and
a more student-centric approach to learning.

The old model of a school building and a teacher "push the content" has
changed little since 1800 despite the advances in technology. Just relax the
assumption that there has to be a physical school and the innovation
opportunities become apparent. More thoughts at
[http://sophisticatedfinance.typepad.com/sophisticated_financ...](http://sophisticatedfinance.typepad.com/sophisticated_finance/2010/12/the-
future-of-education.html)

------
SimonPStevens
My wife is a teacher so I speak with some 2nd hand experience here.

[tl;dr: 1) Innovation does happen, it just doesn't always involve technology
or computers. 2) The system punishes those who innovate.]

Rant 1:

She is constantly innovating in her classroom. She is always looking for new
and better ways to capture students attention and inspire them.

She is head of the department and is also innovating within her department.
She works together with her team (currently 3 including herself) and often
runs things like joint lessons so experience and best practises can be shared
amongst the team.

However, she is not a techie so her innovations are in teaching styles,
delivery, activities, content and management and not technology. I think
sometimes as techies we can be quite arrogant in assuming that innovation must
always involve technology.

Rant 2:

But the biggest problem in teaching is the system. The focus of the system is
so heavily centred around grades that sometimes they forget we are dealing
with children. The system encourages uninnovative parrot style education and
memorisation of past papers so the pupils can reel off a bunch of model
answers to keep the numbers looking good. So those who innovate are often
rewarded with poorer grades because the exams focus on blind memorisation with
no thought.

So much is expected of individual teachers that those who want to innovate
don't have the time. She currently starts work at 7.45 when I drop her at
school. She leaves at 5.30 when I collect her. She does an additional 2-3
hours most evenings and 3-6 hours on a Sunday. She works around 70% of the
time in every halfterm/holiday break with the exception of the summer when we
try to get a solid 2 weeks away somewhere. Add on the frequent parents
evenings, open days and after school events.

The goal posts are frequently changed at both a governmental level, a local
authority level and at an individual school level (sometimes conflicting).
Deadlines are frequently imposed or changed with little or no warning. Unlike
in my industry where if a request is made someone must choose to drop some
existing work to fit it in, they are frequently expected to meet additional
requirements without any reduction elsewhere.

She has been a teacher for 5 years and so far the syllabus in her subject has
changed every single year. This means every year time is wasted re-writing
schemes of work to fit a new syllabus, re-writing mock exams, re-writing
resources and lesson plans. Some churn is obviously good to continuously
improve, but when the required churn is so high there is no time to make
improvements.

Lets add to this the constant pressure of demanding parents who see (or hear
about) every innovation, and any that doesn't fit their own personal mantra
for education they complain (and too much power is given to parents who
complain). It's like having an additional 30 pairs of bosses per project each
with their own totally different opinions on how their child should be
educated (and they all seem to think they are experts and their children are
angels).

Teaching breaks the spirit of even the most passionate rather than rewarding
those who are innovating it crushes them under a mountain of work and
unrealistic expectations.

It's the system that has to change first to reward the right kinds of
behaviour. Every successive government seems to think they are the experts on
education and their changes are forced through so quickly little time or
consideration is given to implementation or if they will actually work.

[UK based btw]

~~~
IsaacL
"However, she is not a techie so her innovations are in teaching styles,
delivery, activities, content and management and not technology. I think
sometimes as techies we can be quite arrogant in assuming that innovation must
always involve technology."

Definitely agree with this. I know UK schools have a budget for technology (or
at least they used to), though a lot of it apparently ended up spent on fancy
new gadgets that were more cool than useful.

~~~
SimonPStevens
There are some things that are good. I don't know how common this is, but in
her school almost every classroom has an "interactive whiteboard" and teachers
all have personal laptops.

This allows some things like use of internet, youtube etc in lessons. (But
training is lacking, and the level of use is highly down to if individual
teachers are prepared to put in the extra work to discover what can be done
with it.)

Also, the availability of commodity technology can lead to innovations in
lessons. For example, one thing she has done is get kids to make very (very)
simple stop frame style animations using regular digital cameras and
powerpoint. This couldn't have been done when I was back in school because the
school couldn't afford a few dozen digital cameras.

------
bakbak
There are people like Dr. Sugata Mitra, who after decade of experiments
brought this innovative concept of 'SOLE' (Self Organized Learning
Environment) ... this can change the world of illiteracy & poverty with little
bit help of philanthropy.

[http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_educa...](http://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_education.html)

------
spir
Public education is destroying America as well as my country (Canada). Most of
the detailed comments in this thread overlook the fact that the devil isn't in
the details. Public education sucks, period. Did you really think you could
combine "monopoly" and "bureaucracy" into "monopolistic bureaucracy" and it
would end well?

------
DanielRibeiro
Fred Wilson was asked this same question on his interview yesterday:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2009662>

He answers this on minute 30 of the interview. And mentions he'd just made his
few pure Education investment.

------
nightlifelover
There is innovation: khanacademy.com

------
kingkawn
We're still in the process of figuring out how to extend education
universally. This is a relatively new idea, and as such has required more than
100 years to get right. Also, as a country (US), it seems we have yet to
decide if its really worth the cost.

------
antidaily
There's a couple Chicago guys trying to make a BlackBoard competitor - no idea
how far along they are. Hope they chime in. Sounded like an interesting
project.

------
ErrantX
Ah, education... this is one of my big bugbears, and it's a really big one, so
bear with me :) The issue is multi-faceted:

* _Stifled curriculum_ ; Here in the UK the curriculum is pretty shoddy. My mother is a primary teacher and trying to innovate her teaching is extremely difficult - the curriculum simply cannot cope. It is unwieldy and disjointed, and almost without exception tech innovators do not understand how it works and how to accomodate it (n.b. this is not simply a tech problem, my dad runs a successful mobile planetarium business and, through my mother, knows how to accomodate what is needed - their competitors pop up every few months and quickly flounder because _school level education is unlike any other learning ever conceived_ :)).

* _Teacher apathy_ ; not all of them, but enough. They follow the worksheets and guidelines and don't "disrupt" the system enough to make a serious change. You'll get a few great ones in each school (I'm sure we all have some memorable/fav teachers) but most are simply either bad or good teachers, and not innovators.

* _Teacher luddites_ ; even the very best teachers can be luddites (meant in a polite sense). Getting them to accept and use new tech is hard enough, but when the teachers often have no IT skills (this is a problem that will be fixed in a few generations, I guess) themselves there is simply no chance :)

* _Teaching unions_ ; don't give a crap about education (partly understandable), and exercise their power to interfere a little too much.

* _Bureaucracy_ ; you honestly have never experienced bureaucracy until you have ever tried to do anything in a school. This varies greatly, and can exist as stupid rules through to silly government policy (the one at the moment is that my mum has to "evidence" and present all the work her kids do during the year... I guess to prove they aren't just playing with lego all day???)

* _Funding_ ; there is none. Most good teachers (esp. primary teachers) will fund a lot of the non-curriculum ideas they have (such as, science clubs) as there is no money. And when there is it is spent shoddily. For example; mums school have digital whiteboards and laptops for all the teachers to hook up. In the last three years they have had three suppliers (all council approved contracts..) - all of who have fucked up in various ways and been replaced. Most of the whiteboards fail at some point (v. poor quality), the laptops are slow, clunky and a mess. They can never get anything done (Mum has a pile of CDs/DVDs with educational programs that she can't "ta da" install on the laptop to test....)

 _tl;dr: education is a mess because previous good education has tried and
failed (dismally) to adopt modern ideas and adapt to modern society. There is
no money, innovation or interest in educating our children._

(n.b. not all teachers are at fault. In fact; a large number will raise these
exact issues if you ask them, but are completely stumped as to how to fix and
disrupt it. Innovation is desperately needed - but be prepared for a long long
slog :))

~~~
eru
> I guess to prove they aren't just playing with lego all day???

Actually, that would be a good idea.

~~~
kongqiu
That would be a fantastic idea, actually.

------
imp
I'm working on education: <http://curiousreef.com>

------
detokaal
I have been a teacher for over 20 years. My tenure has been 1/2 in an upper
middle class community and the recent 1/2 in an inner city school with a 50%
graduation rate and 80% free and reduced lunch rate.

What bothers me about this question is the word "innovation." It is too big.
From a learning standpoint, there is no need for innovation. Research is
pretty clear about the methods by which learning takes place. We have decades
of materials and studies and experience. Of course there is always new
research that might put a fine point on some of these methods, but the basics
are well-known.

From a teaching standpoint, there has some been innovation in the last 15-20
years. This comes primarily from technology in the form of brain scans and
neuroscience. Even still, good teachers have been using methods that take
advantage of this knowledge. But we used it before we knew how it actually
worked. Good teaching hasn't changed as a result, but we are able to show (and
convince) new teachers why you should use a given methodology.

From a technology standpoint (since this is HN I assume that is the direction
you want to go), don't waste your time. Computers in classrooms are just
another tool, like a TV or pencil or book. Technology is just another body of
knowledge students are expected to know before they graduate. We have had
enough studies now that show putting computers in classrooms make no
difference in outcomes. It is only helpful if a teacher is trained to use that
tool, in the same way that a teacher is trained to use books and notes.
Effectiveness is dependent on its use and not merely its presence.

The current classroom innovations in education, and the ones making the most
impact in our schools, and many others, are human relationships. (I will
address innovation outside the classroom in the next paragraph). Students who
connect to teachers learn more in that class. Period. They show up to school,
they listen, they are more likely to do the work, they are more interested in
the material. This has been the saddest revelation to me in my teaching
career. These kids in inner city schools have no dad, many times no mother and
are usually one of several children by different fathers. All of them know of
someone personally or an immediate family member in prison, or dead from
violence or addictions. They are transient with no permanent home. In short,
they are desperate for an adult to care about them. They live day to day and
never learn skills like organizing, planning, or time management. They have no
role model, and it is very difficult to be one as a teacher when you have 35
kids in your classroom for 40 minutes a day. Until a student knows you care,
they don't care what you know or what you have to show them. It helps if they
have a parent who values education, but those are rare. Many students tell me
their parents dropped out of high school and they still have a house and food
and car and cell phone. They do, but it is provided by the government.

The biggest innovation to be made is in the structure. Everything is broken.
Everything. Steve Jobs summed it up nicely. I'll add that as long as education
remains a political issue, politicians with assume control with regulations
and laws that benefit the most powerful voters - the voters most likely to re-
elect them. For a long time that was unions. It is currently shifting to
parents. In some places, business wields the most influence. Let parents
decide where to send their students. Give their money back and let it follow
the kids. Free teachers to achieve a set of standards using the methods and
tools most appropriate for their communities. The standards don't need to
change, but the freedom to teach in the way that is best for your current
group of kids has been taken away.

That's enough - nothing is going to change.

~~~
kongqiu
Exactly. The biggest innovations in education will come not from new
technologies, but from new processes -- ways to improve and/or work around the
existing legacy infrastructure.

I think in the next 5 years we'll see the "groupon" model applied to more and
more social/political/cultural problems. This will carry some risks (we should
all re-read the lessons of the Chinese Cultural Revolution, for example), but
it could be a nice corrective to the current "two parties, one system" model.

------
mr_twj
standardization is one reason: <http://xkcd.com/768/>

------
lhnn
We can't have a revolution in education with the current bureaucracy in place.
You need a more competitive and innovative supply than what we have, which is
what vouchers can help with.

I have a middle ground: Require all charter schools to be "open-source": Open
accounting books for everyone to see. Don't cap profits, don't restrict
teacher pay, simply make all charter schools show what people are spending for
the education they're getting.

The results of the charter schools' performances will show in the quality of
the children coming out, as well as (potentially) by some ostensibly neutral,
non-binding ratings agency. The only thing that can let a charter school be
forced to shut down would be blatant fraud as defined by money laundering or
other abuses (aka not tied to performance).

