Educators often embrace innovation that is supposedly supported by research only to experience high expectation and then low results. Like many educators, I examined Sugata Mitra's talk of his "Hole in the Wall" project with intrigue. His chief claim is that he simply inserted a computer in the wall and students found answers. They organized the information for and among themselves. For a good while, teachers have used computers in classrooms. However, Mitra brings a bit of a twist to the idea that children will naturally teach themselves given a wired computer and opportunity with little or no other resources needed. Some educators, to a degree, might on the surface agree that independent learning can manifest. Mitra also suggests that children will, on their own, go on an educational adventure. That sounds reasonable too. There is also his notion that if the interest of children is captured, learning will take place. Again, some educators might nod in agreement. But it is this type of consensus building that is used to get educators on board at the start of a new program. These ideas and programs are presented as reasonable. Teachers wanting to be flexible, accept and take the prescribed course of action. Certainly, Mr. Mitra has been called a guru. That may help enlarge his audience for the program.
An alternate view of the project comes from David Clark in "Plan B." Clark suggests that Mitra's work does no justice to girls who seem to be left out of the learning. Clark also says it further divides educational opportunities for the most impoverished. The funding is not equally distributed. The pursestrings belongs to a "non-charitable" source. Clark laments that the learning barely scratches the surface of real knowledge. It appears to be low on the instructional scale with no teacher to raise learning. In fact, the project undervalues the role of teacher. They simply aren't needed because children will find answers on their own. Clark's concern, if we are truly to test the sustainability and trust the validity of Holes in the Walls, probably should not be ignored.
Looking at the two perspectives remind educators of the saying, “all that glitters is not gold.” I've been in the crosshairs of educational debates including Accelerated Reader, Khan Academy-styled Flipping Videos and CScope Curriculum. So this topic is personal.
Researched-based Accelerated Reader program promised to impart a love of reading and increase vocabulary and comprehension skills. Results are varied and hotly debated. Natural readers loved AR and struggling readers loathed its testing.
Khan Academy (KA) for flipped learning experienced mixed results also. KA has been heralded as a breakthrough. However, one of the chief concerns of KA is that it can't genuinely replace instruction; it is a resource. That is probably a fair way to look at it. Other critics assert that students accomplish only surface learning. The KA outcomes may have breadth but not depth. This same criticisms have been levied at the Hole in the Wall project.
My district adopted the researched-based C-Scope curriculum as the new savior. It was abandoned after two years especially after it received negative press for a variety of reasons. I reference these three examples because of the considerable cost in either or both time and money.
Because these were my own professional experiences, I felt compelled to make notes about adopting and adapting educational research for future reference.
1. Be inspired by lofty goals of projects and go from there.
When Sugata Mitra presents the Hole in the Wall project, he shares that young students teach themselves English words in order to interact with the computer. I am eager to hear more as he explain how this great byproduct of the project materialize. I’m inspired because it makes me ponder what I can create with my learners.
2. Know your students.
I must keep in view my own students' strengths, vulnerabilities, and potential. To abandon what I know about my students to broadly and blindly accept innovation is a big risk. Clark suggest that girls were vulnerable as they edged out of screen time.
3. Find the balance for my specific learning community
Every class is different and those variable should be taken in consideration when seeking to implement a new program. It is the variables themselves that prevent the exact outcomes surfacing from classroom to classroom. Perhaps Mitra and Clark's views can be blended allowing for students to self organized with teacher as facilitator.
When I listen to Mr. Mitra, I acknowledge that he makes some genuine and valid points. But it appears that he oversimplifies. There are complexities far beyond the points he makes. So when he say, “The bottom line is, if you're not the one controlling your learning, you're not going to learn as well,” I acknowledge that but that responsibility is shared with teachers, classmates, parents and a whole learning community. Students may be primary in that responsibility, but they aren't islands.
“Knowing is NOT the most important thing. To be able to FIND OUT is more important than knowing,” is another assertion that Mr Mitra makes. To become this knowing individual is to sometimes discover multiple truths and possibilities that will require help in navigating. Self-organizing the knowledge for young children in a variety of disciplines is not always possible. Some content will require a guide.
Educators can benefit from Mr. Mitra ideas. I find the evolution and expansion of his Hole in the Wall experiment now called SOLEs (Self Organizing Learning Environments) to be extremely interesting. I will follow this work. I don't discount or make light of what he's shares. But, I will also pay close attention to his critics as well. I simply view it as starting point of what I might be able to accomplish in teaching children to be responsible for their own learning. I think that is a good approach for most educational research.
References:
Kids can teach themselves Sugata Mitra - https://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_shows_how_kids_teach_themselves
Sugata Mitra: Slum chic? 7 reasons for doubt Donald Clark - https://donaldclarkplanb.blogspot.ca/2013/03/sugata-mitra-slum-chic-7-reasons-for.html?m=1
We Need Schools... Not Factories Sugata Mitra - http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sugata-mitra/2013-ted-prize_b_2767598.html
Angel or devil? The strange case of Sugata Mitra https://jeremyharmer.wordpress.com/2014/04/07/angel-or-devil-the-strange-case-of-sugata-mitra/
Top 9 quotes of Sugata Mitra famous quotes, rare quotes and sayings | inspringquotes.us inspiringquotes.us - http://www.inspiringquotes.us/author/7025-sugata-mitra
This article was important and influential for me also this week.
Don’t import the scourge of scientism into schools http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/14005#.WMmPdXeZPeQ
Sonja,
ReplyDeleteThanks for bringing up the Khan Academy/Flipped Classroom model. I have seen the positives and negatives of the model. It can be very beneficial, but students need to learn how to use it properly. Many students will watch a full 7 minute instructional video, but get lost around the 30 second mark and not pause the video in order to slow down the instruction. However, once that simple study habit is taught, usually by a teacher, the student is able to learn from the video much more efficiently. Another issue is accountability, students must know that there are consequences for simply not taking the time to learn and that those consequences will impact them far more in life than a simple grade.
Have you seen any "Hole in the Wall" strategy work well?
As you said, it really helps to know your students!
When I examined Sugata Mitra and David Clarks views on the Hole in the Wall experiment, I couldn't help but think of all of the practices my districts have employed. Some of them were done in haste and I fully understood the pressures to do so. This module, if nothing else, made me realize how vocal teachers need to be in customizing and planning programs before testing them out with our own children. Flipping classroom could've worked with more considerations made.
Delete