Comments on: Is It Really A Disruption?

By: karen

karen — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 13:44:44 +0000

Thanks, Michael, for the clarification. I’m still digesting the book but I did feel like you were in the same boat I am…trying to grapple with what the period of transition will look like as we move (hopefully) from the high stakes testing environment to a more student (and teacher) friendly learning environment.

I haven’t had a chance to see you on the trail but am hoping to attend your session in Second Life next week: http://www.bookosphere.net/michaelhorn/

By: Michael B. Horn

Michael B. Horn — Sat, 13 Dec 2008 07:09:30 +0000

Hi — Thanks for your post. Agree with your point. If the disruption comes and it still looks like today’s schools, we won’t have achieved much. I don’t think we hit the point enough in the book, but I’ve made a point of saying this on the trail quite a bit. If we use the old metrics and regulations to judge the disruption, it’s not clear we’ll move the needle forward at all in a way we’d really like to.

So, to answer your questions on these points:
“Are the kids still taking high-stakes assessments that drive the curriculum? Are they still earning Carnegie units? Are schools still funded by seat time? In other words, is it still about content rather than pedagogy or collaboration?”

I hope the answer to all three is no and that we move to a system that worries about mastery, for example. We’re pretty clear in the book about the disruption of assessment, just to give one concrete example that is in the book.

By: sylvia martinez

sylvia martinez — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 18:28:39 +0000

Karen,
It’s you are right to look at all these critical comments. I think there is a lot of wishful thinking about “schools of the future”. Before they are well defined, people put their hopes and dreams into the empty places and magically morph them into their own vision.

As they say, the devil is in the details.