Friday, 11 July 2008

To Sat or not to Sat ... no question ...

There is no question here for me. Get rid of them and plough the money back into teaching and learning. Particularly learning. John Connell's post of yesterday and my response to it is all part of this agenda. We need to move on from this obsession with measuring what our learners do to supporting their interests and enthusiasms and, as professionals, channel their time and efforts . We are no longer 'training' pupils for jobs but should be providing them with the stepping stones towards a creative, adaptive adult life. And this does not demand to know what Sat level you are ... or for that matter what level you are in anything. Learning and understanding is surely not based on a level of anything.

Today the BBC report that Sats results expected to fall I am totally amazed that such an arbitrary scale can be deemed to rise and fall anyway. But this BBC comment is based on an organisational juggle. Am I bovvered? Not a bit.

It is all okay though because the MPs are going to 'grill' the exam chiefs. What an incredible smoke-screen. Have you heard the one about 'wood' and 'trees'?

There is a problem with the amount of money being spent on 'weighing' our children but this really is not a big issue. But the fact that it diverts attention away from looking forward to the challenges of 'learning 2.0' is a problem.

We must be planning to move the focus of education from pedagogy - in a blended way -towards andragogy and heutagogy. The ownership of the learning must be invested in the learners and it is their active participation in their own learning that education should seek. Selling them the idea that tests show what they can do and what they will be able to do is just not fair ... we need to move on.

John says that, at the moment he 'doesn't buy it', but he does comment that, the context within which education systems need to work is changed. He continues ... The key sets of stakeholders, the world over – governments, parents, business, the teaching profession, universities – remain obdurately tied to industrial-age education ... when we don't live in one any more. A read of The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century by Thomas L. Friedman will indicate why a change of perspective is important.

Labels: , , , ,

2 Comments:

At 12 July 2008 09:40 , Anonymous John Connell said...

Just to be clear, Doug, what I don't buy at the moment is the inevitability of the shift to Learning 2.0. I completely buy the need to make the shift - I'm just not as convinced as some that it will happen anyway, that there is an inexorable logic to the shift. There are too many barriers to change at the present time (I might write something on the barriers we have to cross).

So, I think we have a lot of work to do to get there - a challlenge to enjoy, though!

 
At 12 July 2008 11:00 , Blogger Doug said...

Thanks for the clarity John.

For me it is not so much as an inevitability but an essential step. I can see all of the institutional barriers and I do recognise the amount of shifting of minds that is needed ... but I do feel the need to hurdle all of these in one go. If we don't do this, by the time we get round to it, the priorities and the technologies to assist will have changed out of all proportion.

We could, of course, sit back and let it all carry on the way it is. I think a SWOT analysis is called for.

Looking forward to reading about your view of the barriers and to see if I have the strength and the will to hurdle them.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home