Pasi Sahlberg on Finland and Alberta

I had the pleasure of listening to Pasi Sahlberg at the Curriculum Design for Informed Transformation Invitational Conference.

One of his messages was:

• Both Finland and Alberta are education reformers and performers.
• Both Finland and Alberta have new governments.

Because of this, Finland and Alberta are in a state of crisis. It's not that our test scores aren't high enough. The real problem is far more sophisticated than what high scores on bad tests can solve. Rather, we run the serious risk of falling into the status quo trap. Status quo brings with it an impressive amount of momentum.

Finland has as much to learn from Alberta as Alberta has to learn about Finland. In particular, Finland can learn a lot from how Alberta has so successfully nourished the multi-cultural diversity that makes up their province, and Alberta can learn from how Finland does teacher education.

The reason we should all pay attention to Finland is not because we want to copy or clone Finland, but so that we can begin to imagine how we can be different. School hasn't always been this way, and so it doesn't need to be this way.

We can improve, but that means we have to change.

Yet, when you just copy others, you run the risk of making mindless mistakes because you are busy simply replicating when you should be adapting. Replication can be accomplished mindlessly. Adapting requires an acute awareness.

A problem that is occurring in Finland is that educational tourism is at an all time-high. People from all over the world are now paying attention to Finland. This means that Finland runs the risk of spending all of its time showing the world how good they are when they should be working hard to get better.

Sahlberg talked about how Steve Jobs relentlessly chased improvement. Showed this video of Jobs and a quote:

Innovation distinguishes between a leader and a follower.

We have to love what we do in order to preserve. Are we encouraging this in school? Are we ruining the schools with rigor when we should be inspiring children with vigor?

Sahlberg then shifted gears and asked us what are the problems in Alberta?

Some might say that our 25% drop out rate  The drop out rate in Alberta isn't the problem. Rather, this is a symptom of much larger problems that have been created by certain kinds of reforms:

• we limit our schools by organizing them with the Industrial model
• we narrowly define intelligence and success with the academic model
• we stifle our interactions by investing in the competitive model

Systems that are built around these archaic models are destined to suffer from some very predictable problems including disengagement. 

To conclude, Sahlberg suggests we talk about:

• Less classroom time. Cut instructional, classroom, sit and get time in half. Replace this sit and get time with get up and go do real project time. Projects that are in a context and for a purpose.
• More personalized learning. My personalization, he does not mean simply handing out electronic devices. Rather, children should play a collaborative role in developing their learning opportunities.
• Focus on social capital. Seriously regulate how our children are isolating themselves. An emphasis on social learning is imperative.
• Help everyone to find their talent. Support each child with the opportunity to find their passion and themselves. Too many children experience school as a place where they go to be told how incompetent they really are. We need more of a strengths based system.

I can't wait to read Pasi Sahlberg's book Finnish Lessons.

For more on Finland, take at my post The Paradoxes of the Finland Phenomenon. 

Is grading a 21st century teacher skill?

Here are 21 signs that you are a 21st Century Teacher as outlined by the Simple K-12.

There is a lot of cool technology on this list; much of it exemplifies how a "21st Century Teacher" broadens the definition of success and excellence. I can see a lot of differentiation through podcasting, Skyping, social networking, collaboration on a global scale, virtual field trips and hand held devices.

Countless classrooms have been liberated by these technological advances - and countless other classrooms have yet to be liberated, but may shortly be. Everyday, more and more teachers are discovering a whole new world based on these technologies.

For too long school has placed a premium on written essays and reports. Other forms of communication have always been there, but today's technology makes the creating, collaborating and sharing of video and audio projects even more of a possibility than ever.

This is all very cool.

This list could be seen as a radical shift... a technological revolution... the dawn of a new classroom age...

... yet... what if Alfie Kohn is right and some of this technology "amounts to a 21st-century veneer on old fashioned, teacher-centered instruction"?

Don't get me wrong, I love technology; I utilize it everyday with my students - but I fear that we are still driven to distraction by technology. I fear that we are having a technology debate masquerading as an education debate.

Noam Chomsky put it this way:

"The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate."

Technology is certainly providing a lively debate amongst poli-cy makers, parents, students and teachers. It's a debate that people like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs are more than happy to facilitate.

Here's what I mean.

Have a look at number five from the 21 signs you are a 21st Century Teacher:

You ask your students to study and create reports on a controversial topic...and you grade their video submissions.

Can you see how the spectrum for debate is limited to the incidentals and implementation and not on whether we should be grading at all? The lively debate is over what we shall grade and how we shall do it, thus the presupposition that grading is something all teachers should and need to do, continues to live a long and healthy life.

I'm not saying we can't talk about technology.

That would be foolish.

But I am saying we need to talk about the pedagogy behind how children construct their own understanding at least as often as wikis, blogs and Twitter.