While I agree with some of the ideas (in spirit), I find most of the positions advocated to be hard to stomach.
On a practical note, it hard to see how any sort of "national educational reform" could survive the kind of political backlash it would have in smaller communities. At best, you will end up with some kind of watered down nonsense, and at worst there's the specter of "No Child Left Behind". Is that the kind of mistake you want to make again?
Furthermore, I don't agree with the whole "e-learning" slant to the article. I tried that route myself several times and gained nothing for my efforts. A lot of the "creative tools" for e-learning are nothing more than rote memorization in disguise (think: smart.fm). Yes, it would be nice to expand the educational experience and offer a wider variety of courses and topics, but without constant PHYSICAL access to a teacher or professor, it is hard to gain a proper understanding of the subject. Putting kids behind a computer and telling them to distance learn is not the solution.
I manage the IT for a non-public school. We accept kids who are too disruptive to be in the public schools so we deal with several school districts extensively. So I have friends in the IT departments of just about every Southern California school district.
Given that experience I can say with some authority that this "high level thinking" means nothing until someone can solve the practical problems with getting technology into schools
Just one example, most school districts have something in the area of 1 support staff per 5 to 10 schools. You start deploying large technology outlays and make them integral to the lesson plans of the class and the need for support staff shoots up to 1 per school. So just getting the computers in the classroom requires 10 times more staff AND the money for the computers. While this very article cites how scarce money is.
Every IT person I know who works for a school district would love to see technology used in the classroom more. Many would work day and night if they felt there was a chance to make real changes. But the hurdles to getting there are seemingly insurmountable only serves to demoralize the people facing those hurdles.
"In order to transform our factory-era schools into a truly student-centric system fit for the 21st-century, the funds should be used to innovate disruptively."
In my ideal school the kid who turns in that sentence gets sent back to do a few more drafts.
"And the best way to do that is by implementing online learning – an approach that’s constantly improving in its ability to deliver personalized, high-quality learning experiences to students from all walks of life, regardless of geography, special needs, or socioeconomic background."
Personalized? I wonder. Constantly improving--that could be true but irrelevant.
America has a real bent for taking labor-intensive work and applying technology. This works beautifully for all sorts of work, but will not, I think, work well for instruction.
Wow. Personalized learning!?!?! Too bad I've already been screwed by the education system because of undiagnosed ADHD... Thank you Obama, from saving me from having to fight for this change.
On a practical note, it hard to see how any sort of "national educational reform" could survive the kind of political backlash it would have in smaller communities. At best, you will end up with some kind of watered down nonsense, and at worst there's the specter of "No Child Left Behind". Is that the kind of mistake you want to make again?
Furthermore, I don't agree with the whole "e-learning" slant to the article. I tried that route myself several times and gained nothing for my efforts. A lot of the "creative tools" for e-learning are nothing more than rote memorization in disguise (think: smart.fm). Yes, it would be nice to expand the educational experience and offer a wider variety of courses and topics, but without constant PHYSICAL access to a teacher or professor, it is hard to gain a proper understanding of the subject. Putting kids behind a computer and telling them to distance learn is not the solution.