Comments on: The Obsolete Classroom: Rethinking Education in the Information Age http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/ Sat, 13 Feb 2010 15:10:29 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8 hourly 1 By: Michael Anuzis » S.Korea Leads Efficiency in Education http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-14072 Michael Anuzis » S.Korea Leads Efficiency in Education Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:30:33 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-14072 [...] Reminds me of my ‘06 post ‘The Obsolete Classroom: Rethinking Education in the Information Age’ [...] [...] Reminds me of my ‘06 post ‘The Obsolete Classroom: Rethinking Education in the Information Age’ [...]

]]> By: Florian http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-391 Florian Mon, 29 Jan 2007 16:52:15 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-391 Hi, I found your blog via google by accident and have to admit that youve a really interesting blog :-) Just saved your feed in my reader, have a nice day :) Hi,
I found your blog via google by accident and have to admit that youve a really interesting blog :-)
Just saved your feed in my reader, have a nice day :)

]]> By: understanding » Struggling with ‘Literacy’ http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-35 understanding » Struggling with ‘Literacy’ Sun, 05 Nov 2006 00:17:10 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-35 [...] Classroom instruction is clunky and chunky by comparison to individual one-on-one teaching. (As discussed over on the lovely blog of Michael Anuzis.) If we were to approach this individually, I can imagine sitting down with a student at a web browser and guiding different kinds of exploration, asking questions or posing assignments along the way. Or if I had a computer on every desk in my classroom, I would certainly need to address the challenge of how to use them effectively. Yet neither is the reality. [...] [...] Classroom instruction is clunky and chunky by comparison to individual one-on-one teaching. (As discussed over on the lovely blog of Michael Anuzis.) If we were to approach this individually, I can imagine sitting down with a student at a web browser and guiding different kinds of exploration, asking questions or posing assignments along the way. Or if I had a computer on every desk in my classroom, I would certainly need to address the challenge of how to use them effectively. Yet neither is the reality. [...]

]]> By: anuzis http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-27 anuzis Sat, 28 Oct 2006 13:16:45 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-27 mrc - thanks for sharing your insight. I agree with you on every point but one - that the videos should be teacher-centric rather than student-centric. It would be great to have lessons dedicated to helping teachers improve their teaching ability in general, along with clips of specific lessons in their specialized body of knowledge for more specific lessons, but the better the content is able to teach someone from the ground up the better it'll naturally be at assisting teachers as well. You're absolutely right on the benefits of 1-on-1 teaching. It's certainly got its advantages over pre-arranged teaching content. For those of us who no longer have access to Geometry teachers, however, it would be nice to have a 5-hour extremely well-laid out course available to get a refresher on the subject (or with any other body of knowldge we may have lost over the years). Teachers specialized in X are only available to a tiny subset of the population at any given time; & effective, dynamic content for those with the desire to self-learn would be a invaluable for the rest of us. Thanks again for your insightful response. mrc – thanks for sharing your insight. I agree with you on every point but one – that the videos should be teacher-centric rather than student-centric. It would be great to have lessons dedicated to helping teachers improve their teaching ability in general, along with clips of specific lessons in their specialized body of knowledge for more specific lessons, but the better the content is able to teach someone from the ground up the better it’ll naturally be at assisting teachers as well.

You’re absolutely right on the benefits of 1-on-1 teaching. It’s certainly got its advantages over pre-arranged teaching content. For those of us who no longer have access to Geometry teachers, however, it would be nice to have a 5-hour extremely well-laid out course available to get a refresher on the subject (or with any other body of knowldge we may have lost over the years).

Teachers specialized in X are only available to a tiny subset of the population at any given time; & effective, dynamic content for those with the desire to self-learn would be a invaluable for the rest of us.

Thanks again for your insightful response.

]]> By: mrc http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-25 mrc Sat, 28 Oct 2006 07:02:12 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-25 I like the idea of exploring how to get some of the benefit of one-on-one instruction delivered to more students. My initial sense is it's a lot harder to get that benefit than it might seem. When I think about what I do as a Geometry teacher when I'm working with an individual student, I notice a few things: First, I'm adapting my vocabulary and style based on who the student is and how they interact with me to keep them engaged and not frustrated. Second, I'm constantly asking questions and checking for understanding with each component concept and skill. Third, I'm using those answers to hone in on areas of confusion so that I can clarify them by providing examples and details, but only where necessary. This is why it's so fast. Finally, I'm guiding the overall direction of the conversation toward the eventual learning goal. Why break all of this down? Well, I think that these are generally difficult things to do in an automated or self-directed way. I love watching good lectures, and they give me ideas for things I might use or try with my students. I'm just not convinced that it's better (or more efficient, even) to try to encode all of the information about the interrelated concepts of mathematics and the even more vast number of ways people might misunderstand those concepts, along with questions that will accurately test how things are going along the way. I think it's a lot to ask someone to be simultaneously learning abstract concepts and monitoring their own progress through a field whose terrain they don't yet know. Of course we eventually want students to get better at this sort of thing. But there's a reason we don't just give people a copy of the Physician's Desk Reference book and have them diagnose their own illnesses. Neither medicine nor teaching can be reduced to a flow chart. Live, in-person doctors serve a purpose. Live, in-person teachers also serve a purpose, and it's much more than just providing a "human touch" -- the background knowledge and ability to adjust and communicate the context appropriate to various learners is an extremely complicated and difficult task that computers just aren't good at yet. That leaves me in the odd position of advocating that we somehow try to generate more talented teachers. Maybe that's where this videos come in -- we should be seeing examples of the best as we learn how to teach our subjects. I like the idea of exploring how to get some of the benefit of one-on-one instruction delivered to more students. My initial sense is it’s a lot harder to get that benefit than it might seem. When I think about what I do as a Geometry teacher when I’m working with an individual student, I notice a few things: First, I’m adapting my vocabulary and style based on who the student is and how they interact with me to keep them engaged and not frustrated. Second, I’m constantly asking questions and checking for understanding with each component concept and skill. Third, I’m using those answers to hone in on areas of confusion so that I can clarify them by providing examples and details, but only where necessary. This is why it’s so fast. Finally, I’m guiding the overall direction of the conversation toward the eventual learning goal.

Why break all of this down? Well, I think that these are generally difficult things to do in an automated or self-directed way. I love watching good lectures, and they give me ideas for things I might use or try with my students. I’m just not convinced that it’s better (or more efficient, even) to try to encode all of the information about the interrelated concepts of mathematics and the even more vast number of ways people might misunderstand those concepts, along with questions that will accurately test how things are going along the way. I think it’s a lot to ask someone to be simultaneously learning abstract concepts and monitoring their own progress through a field whose terrain they don’t yet know. Of course we eventually want students to get better at this sort of thing. But there’s a reason we don’t just give people a copy of the Physician’s Desk Reference book and have them diagnose their own illnesses. Neither medicine nor teaching can be reduced to a flow chart. Live, in-person doctors serve a purpose. Live, in-person teachers also serve a purpose, and it’s much more than just providing a “human touch” — the background knowledge and ability to adjust and communicate the context appropriate to various learners is an extremely complicated and difficult task that computers just aren’t good at yet.

That leaves me in the odd position of advocating that we somehow try to generate more talented teachers. Maybe that’s where this videos come in — we should be seeing examples of the best as we learn how to teach our subjects.

]]> By: Ray http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-14 Ray Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:51:25 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-14 I agree whole-heartedly that this would be a great way to supplement learning - especially technical learning. For example, people know that they don't teach much at Harvard but the social networking that happens there really helps their grads. There are certain areas that require more teamwork and collaborative learning but things like Math would be great for this method. Remember "The World is Flat" talked about the tutoring of American students by Indians? One-on-one is still the best. I agree whole-heartedly that this would be a great way to supplement learning – especially technical learning. For example, people know that they don’t teach much at Harvard but the social networking that happens there really helps their grads. There are certain areas that require more teamwork and collaborative learning but things like Math would be great for this method. Remember “The World is Flat” talked about the tutoring of American students by Indians? One-on-one is still the best.

]]> By: anuzis http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-13 anuzis Thu, 12 Oct 2006 02:50:01 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-13 Ray - great point. The educational framework I propose isn't intended to replace the current system. It's meant to be flexible and supplement learning in whatever capacity is optimal. There are some bodies of knowledge that would be perfect to assimilate in such a system, and there are others where teamwork, discussion, and collaboration enable optimal learning. Teachers will play a crucial role in facilitating learning in these interactive courses. Give students the option to excel at their own speed with the raw-conceptual\pure declarative-knowledge classes, and we are free to emphasize more social-oriented learning in the class. I imagine this system would never completely replace the traditional model even in the classes that are perfect for it - I am, however, strongly convinced that such an option should be available & would prove invaluable to the global community. Ray – great point. The educational framework I propose isn’t intended to replace the current system. It’s meant to be flexible and supplement learning in whatever capacity is optimal.

There are some bodies of knowledge that would be perfect to assimilate in such a system, and there are others where teamwork, discussion, and collaboration enable optimal learning. Teachers will play a crucial role in facilitating learning in these interactive courses.

Give students the option to excel at their own speed with the raw-conceptual\pure declarative-knowledge classes, and we are free to emphasize more social-oriented learning in the class.

I imagine this system would never completely replace the traditional model even in the classes that are perfect for it – I am, however, strongly convinced that such an option should be available & would prove invaluable to the global community.

]]> By: Ray http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-12 Ray Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:22:28 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-12 I can't edit my post but I'd like to add that this was Stats350 at the University of Michigan, not a shabby school. Not easy. I managed to learn a semester's worth in a few hours from Michael. I can’t edit my post but I’d like to add that this was Stats350 at the University of Michigan, not a shabby school. Not easy. I managed to learn a semester’s worth in a few hours from Michael.

]]> By: Ray http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-11 Ray Wed, 11 Oct 2006 15:20:44 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-11 Michael - loved the post. 2 points. 1) Exponential Improvement is Simple - I agree fully with this. Remember when I didn't pay much attention in stats and barely did the homework and had that final when I had the 18 credits? I thought I was going to fail the class, I knew nothing. In a few hours, you had taught me everything and I aced the test and brought my B to an A-. Thank you for being a great stats. teacher and the ironic thing is that I did like our teacher alot as a person, but for some reason I learned alot more from you. I think this anecdote further supports your point. 2) As a whole - I agree fully with your article but I find that there is one key flaw which is very indirect. In our society today, I believe that we are moving towards a service orientation rather than knowledge. Knowledge and supply chains can be outsourced to other countries but service and interactions with clients can't. When I met some home-schooled kids in middle & high school and at Michigan, I noticed their social skills were much weaker. I I think your model is superior for learning knowledge but at the same time limits a person's social development tremendously. The people who rise to the top of corporate ladders aren't necessarily the smartest ones per se, but rather the most socially cunning and good at bridging the gaps of the knowledgable people. Maybe you could address this point in a edit? Michael – loved the post. 2 points.

1) Exponential Improvement is Simple – I agree fully with this. Remember when I didn’t pay much attention in stats and barely did the homework and had that final when I had the 18 credits? I thought I was going to fail the class, I knew nothing. In a few hours, you had taught me everything and I aced the test and brought my B to an A-. Thank you for being a great stats. teacher and the ironic thing is that I did like our teacher alot as a person, but for some reason I learned alot more from you. I think this anecdote further supports your point.

2) As a whole – I agree fully with your article but I find that there is one key flaw which is very indirect. In our society today, I believe that we are moving towards a service orientation rather than knowledge. Knowledge and supply chains can be outsourced to other countries but service and interactions with clients can’t. When I met some home-schooled kids in middle & high school and at Michigan, I noticed their social skills were much weaker. I I think your model is superior for learning knowledge but at the same time limits a person’s social development tremendously. The people who rise to the top of corporate ladders aren’t necessarily the smartest ones per se, but rather the most socially cunning and good at bridging the gaps of the knowledgable people. Maybe you could address this point in a edit?

]]> By: Jonathan http://www.michaelanuzis.com/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/comment-page-1/#comment-10 Jonathan Tue, 10 Oct 2006 01:30:46 +0000 http://www.2core.com/blog/2006/10/09/the-obsolete-classroom-rethinking-education-in-the-information-age/#comment-10 Brilliant! Brilliant!

]]>