The case for the first part of the headline is laid out in the first paragraph, and it's hard typo deny: "Our focus on testing made learning small and easy to grade rather than valuable. We pretend there is an average kid who is supposed to be at this thing called grade level. We organize secondary schools in ways that prevent us from understanding learners, building sustained relationships, or doing interesting community-connected work. We don't focus on or provide any feedback on the most important skills." But does science have the answer? Tom Vander Ark argues that "The pandemic laid bare the inequity and inadequacy of the patchwork American system of education. It made clear that learner experience (LX) is an invention opportunity." Well, yueah, but should this invention consist of the 12 things he argues should be done for students (or done to students)? Or wouldn't it be better to think of these as 12 degrees of freedom?
Today: 1 Total: 16 [Direct link] [Share]
