In the past decade and a half cellphones have evolved from contraptions you make calls from to devices that do so much more. Now they can help you organize your social life, perform your banking and act as a food diary. There’s an app to be found that is based on your entire existence!
With tablets being commonly used in schools, and the fact that ICT is a relatively new subject, technology is changing the way students are being taught.
In this piece, we’ll provide a comprehensive guide of how technology will shape the future of education and what students will be studying and using in years to come.
From making use of 3D printers, to using virtual reality as part of an immersive learning experience, the possibilities are endless!
So what are you waiting for? Take that first step to get ahead in the future by having a sneak peek in this infographic from our friends at educationcity.com.
“Pay attention students, write this down for memorization.” The Trivium and Quadrivium, medieval revival of classical Greek education theories, defined the seven liberal arts necessary as preparation for entering higher education: grammar, logic, rhetoric, astronomy, geometry, arithmetic, and music. Even today, the education disciplines identified since Greek times are still reflected in many education systems. Numerous disciplines and branches have since emerged, ranging from history to computer science…
Now comes the Information Age, bringing with it Big Data, cloud computing, artificial intelligence as well as visualization techniques that facilitate the learning of knowledge.
All this technology dramatically increased the amount of knowledge we could access and the speed at which we could generate answers to our questions.
“New and more innovative knowledge maps are now needed to help us navigate the complexities of our expanding landscape of knowledge,” says Charles Fadel. Fadel is the founder of the Center for Curriculum Redesign, which has been producing new knowledge maps that redesign knowledge standards from the ground up. “Understanding the interrelatedness of knowledge areas will help to uncover a logical and effective progression for learning that achieves deep understanding.”
Joining us inThe Global Search for Educationto talk about what students should learn in the age of AI is Charles Fadel, author ofFour-Dimensional Education: The Competencies Learners Need to Succeed.
“We need to identify the Essential Content and Core Concepts for each discipline – that’s what the curation effort must achieve so as to leave time and space for deepening the disciplines’ understanding and developing competencies.” — Charles Fadel
Charles, today students have the ability to look up anything. Technology that enables them to do this is also improving all the time. If I want to solve a math problem, I use my calculator, and if I want to write a report on the global effects of climate change, I pull out my mobile. How much of the data kids are being forced to memorize in school is now a waste of time?
The Greeks bemoaned the invention of the alphabet because people did not have to memorize the Iliad anymore. Anthropologists tell us that memorization is far more trained in populations that are illiterate or do not have access to books. So needing to memorize even less in an age of Search is a natural evolution.
However, there are also valid reasons for why somecarefully curatedcontent will always be necessary. Firstly, Automaticity. It would be implausible for anyone to constantly look up words or simple multiplications – it just takes too long and breaks the thought process, very inefficiently. Secondly, Learning Progressions. A number of disciplines need a gradual progression towards expertise, and again, one cannot constantly look things up, this would be completely unworkable. Finally, Competencies (Skills, Character, Meta-Learning). Those cannot be developed in thin air as they need a base of (modernized, curated) knowledge to leverage.
Sometimes people will say “Google knows everything” and it is striking, but the reality is that for now, Googlestoreseverything. Of course, with AI, what is emerging now is the ability toanalyzea large number of specific problems and make predictions, so eventually, Google and similar companies will know a lot more than humans can about themselves!
Closeup of mobile phone with language learning application in jeans pocket. focus on screen
“What we need to test for is Transfer – the ability to use something we have learned in a completely different context. This has always been the goal of an Education, but now algorithms will allow us to focus on that goal even more, by ‘flipping the curriculum’.” — Charles Fadel
If Child A has memorized the data in her head while Child B has to look up the answers, some might argue that Child A is smarter than Child B. I would argue that AI has leveled the playing field for Child A and Child B, particularly if Child B is digitally literate, creative and passionate about learning. What are your thoughts?
First, let’s not conflate memory with intelligence, which games like Jeopardy implicitly do. The fact that Child A memorized data does not mean they are “smarter” than Child B, even though memory implies a modicum of intelligence. Second, even Child B will need some level of content knowledge to be creative, etc. Again, this is not developed in thin air, per the conversation above.
So it is a false dichotomy to talk about KnowledgeorCompetencies (Skills/Character/Meta-learning), it has to be Knowledge (modernized, curated) and Competencies. We’d want children to both Know and Do, with creativity and curiosity.
Lastly, we need to identify the Essential Content and Core Concepts for each discipline – that’s what the curation effort must achieve so as to leave time and space for deepening the disciplines’ understandinganddeveloping competencies.
Given the impact of AI today and the advancements we expect by this time next year, when should school districts introduce open laptop examinations to allow students equal access to information and place emphasis on their thinkingskills?
The question has more to do with Search algorithms than with AI, but regardless, real-life is open-book, and so should exams be alike. And yes, this will force students to actually understand their materials, provided the tests do more than multiple-choice trivialities, which by the way we find even at college levels for the sake of ease of grading.
What we need to test for is Transfer – the ability to use something we have learned in a completely different context. This has always been the goal of an Education, but now algorithms (search, AI) will allow us to focus on that goal even more, by “flipping the curriculum”.
Today, if a learner wants to do a deep dive into any specific subject, AI search allows her to do this outside of classroom time. What do you say to a history teacher who argues there’s no need to revise subject content in his classroom?
For all disciplines, not just History, we must strike the careful balance between “just-in-time, in context” vs “just-in-case”. Context matters to anchor the learning: in other words, real-world projects give immediaterelevancefor the learning, which helps it to be absorbed. And yet projects can also be time-inefficient, so a healthy balance of didactic methods like lectures are still necessary.McKinseyhas recently shown that today that ratio is about 25% projects, which should grow a bit more over time as education systems embed them better, with better teacher training.
Second, it should be perfectly fine for any student to do deep dives as they see fit, but again in balance: there are other competencies needed to becoming a more complete individual, and if one is ahead of the curve in a specific topic, it is of course very tempting to follow one’s passion. And at the same time, it is important to make sure that other competencies get developed too. So, balance and a discriminating mind matter.
Employers consider ethics, leadership, resilience, curiosity,mindfulness and courage as being of “very high” importance to preparing students for the workplace. How does your curriculum satisfy employers’ demands today and in the years ahead?
These Character qualities are essential foremployersand life needs alike, and they have converged away from the false dichotomy of “employability or psycho-social needs.” A modern curriculum ensures that these qualities are developeddeliberately, systematically, comprehensively, and demonstrably. This is achieved by matrixing them with the Knowledge dimension, meaning teaching Resilience via Mathematics, Mindfulness via History, etc. Employers have a mixed view and success as to how to assess these qualities, so it is a bit unfair that they would demand specificity they do not have. And it is also unfitting of school systems to lose relevance.
people, education, technology and exam concept – close up of students with smartphones taking picture of books page and making cheat sheet in school library
“Educators have been tone-deaf to the needs of employers and society to educate broad and deep individuals, not merely ones that may go to college. The anchoring of this problem comes from university entrance requirements.” — Charles Fadel
There is a significant gap between employers’ view of the preparation levels of students and the views of students and educators. The problem likely exists partly because of incorrect assumptions on both sides, but there are also valid deficiencies. What specific inadequacies are behind this gap? What system or process can be devised to resolve this issue?
On one side, employers are expecting too much and shirking their responsibility to bring up the level of their employees, expecting them to graduate 100% “ready to work” and having to spend nothing more than job-specific training at best. On the other side, educators have been tone-deaf to the needs of employers and society to educate broad and deep individuals, not merely ones that may go to college.
The anchoring of this problem comes from university entrance requirements (in the US, AP classes, etc.) and their associated assessments (SAT/ACT scores). They have for decades back-biased what is taught in schools, in a very self-serving manner – narrowly as a test of whether a student will succeed at university. It is time to deconstruct the requirements to broaden/deepen them to serve multiple stakeholders. For the Silo, C.M. Rubin.
Join me and globally renowned thought leaders including Sir Michael Barber (UK), Dr. Michael Block (U.S.), Dr. Leon Botstein (U.S.), Professor Clay Christensen (U.S.), Dr. Linda Darling-Hammond (U.S.), Dr. MadhavChavan (India), Charles Fadel (U.S.), Professor Michael Fullan (Canada), Professor Howard Gardner (U.S.), Professor Andy Hargreaves (U.S.), Professor Yvonne Hellman (The Netherlands), Professor Kristin Helstad (Norway), Jean Hendrickson (U.S.), Professor Rose Hipkins (New Zealand), Professor Cornelia Hoogland (Canada), Honourable Jeff Johnson (Canada), Mme. Chantal Kaufmann (Belgium), Dr. EijaKauppinen (Finland), State Secretary TapioKosunen (Finland), Professor Dominique Lafontaine (Belgium), Professor Hugh Lauder (UK), Lord Ken Macdonald (UK), Professor Geoff Masters (Australia), Professor Barry McGaw (Australia), Shiv Nadar (India), Professor R. Natarajan (India), Dr. Pak Tee Ng (Singapore), Dr. Denise Pope (US), Sridhar Rajagopalan (India), Dr. Diane Ravitch (U.S.), Richard Wilson Riley (U.S.), Sir Ken Robinson (UK), Professor Pasi Sahlberg (Finland), Professor Manabu Sato (Japan), Andreas Schleicher (PISA, OECD), Dr. Anthony Seldon (UK), Dr. David Shaffer (U.S.), Dr. Kirsten Sivesind (Norway), Chancellor Stephen Spahn (U.S.), Yves Theze (LyceeFrancais U.S.), Professor Charles Ungerleider (Canada), Professor Tony Wagner (U.S.), Sir David Watson (UK), Professor Dylan Wiliam (UK), Dr. Mark Wormald (UK), Professor Theo Wubbels (The Netherlands), Professor Michael Young (UK), and Professor Minxuan Zhang (China) as they explore the big picture education questions that all nations face today.
C. M. Rubin is the author of two widely read online series for which she received a 2011 Upton Sinclair award, “The Global Search for Education” and “How Will We Read?” She is also the author of three bestselling books, includingThe Real Alice in Wonderland, is the publisher ofCMRubinWorldand is a Disruptor Foundation Fellow.
NEW YORK, NY (PRWEB)- According to the White House, by 2018, 51 percent of STEM jobs will be in computer science-related fields. However, the number of tech employees has not increased along with the number of jobs available. Why? The answer is simple: lack of relevant education. The White House maintains that just one quarter of K-12 schools offer high-quality computer science with programming and coding. In addition, in 2016, the PEW Research Center reported that only 17% of adults believed they were “digitally ready.” Technology is changing the way that we live and work, and it’s happening fast. So how do we ensure that individuals (especially girls and women) are digitally literate?
In my new interview below with C.M. Rubin (founder of CMRubinWorld), Derek Lo says he started Py because he wanted to demystify “coding”. His app does this by making coding fun. The program also avoids using any programming jargon until the learner is ready. Lo states that “gamification isn’t a hindrance to learning—-it accelerates it.” He further notes that coding “instills a greater aptitude for systematic thinking and logical decision making.” Lo recently partnered with the not for profit Girls Who Code to further reduce the gender gap and “change people’s image of who a coder is.”
“We specifically write our content using language that even young children can understand.” — Derek Lo
Why were 600,000 high-paying tech jobs unfilled in 2015 in the United States alone, or is the better question: Is technology developing faster than humans can learn to handle it?
When we look at diversity, things only get worse. In 2015, 22 percent of students taking the AP Computer Science exam were girls while 13 percent were African-American or Latino. These statistics are not U.S. specific; in 2015, Australia reported that only 28 percent of ICT jobs were held by women.
Coding has always been regarded as a mysterious field, something Derek Lo, co-founder of the new application “Py”, wants to change. Launched in 2016, the application offers interactive courses on everything from Python to iOS development. The “unique value proposition,” as Lo puts it, has been a revolutionary success. The fun-oriented application has so far resulted in over 100,000 downloads on both iTunes and Google Play.
Most parents frown when kids use their phones at the dinner table, but what if the kids were learning to code over Sunday roast? “Ok, so maybe not the Sunday roast, but seriously, could a more accessible and fun coding application make all the difference?”
The Global Search for Education is excited to welcome one of Py’s founders, Derek Lo, to discuss how Py’s revolutionary approach is literally making coding cool.
“Coding can provide people with the awesome ability of being able to create tangible things like websites and apps. It also instills less tangible things like a greater aptitude for systematic thinking and logical decision making.” — Derek Lo
People say education today is often treated as a business and that individual students’ needs have not been prioritized enough. As the number of qualified applicants increases, can individualized learning tools, such as Py, help today’s generations remain competent in our globalized world, even with “broken” education systems?
Yes. As college acceptance rates decline, more people will need alternatives for learning career-essential skills, and we believe Py will be a big part of that. Using machine learning algorithms, we’re able to adapt the user experience based on prior skill and behavior within the app, creating a tailored curriculum. Having a personal tutor in your pocket that knows how you learn and what you should be learning is powerful and why we are investing in personalization.
Py provides its users with a simple and easy platform while many other coding applications (e.g. Solo Learn) have opted for more traditional and serious lesson plans. Does making learning applications appear more serious fuel the conception that coding is a hard and scary thing to learn? Are we over-complicating the field of coding and making it seem inaccessible for people or should students really be this wary of programming?
One of the reasons that my co-founder and I started Py is to demystify “coding”. We make it easy by making it fun. When you’re dragging pretty blocks around and pressing colorful buttons, it doesn’t feel like work. Yet users are still soaking up all the same knowledge they would be by slogging through a boring textbook. We also intentionally avoid programming jargon until the learner is ready. A good example is when we teach users about loops—-we use words like “repeat” instead of “iterate”. Almost all of Py’s courses are focused on teaching the fundamental concepts using simple language and in an interactive fashion.
Also, many people are scared away from learning how to code because they hear from friends that computer science is such a difficult major in school. An important thing to realize is that there’s a big difference between theoretical computer science and making a simple website. An art major might not need to understand Dijkstra’s algorithm, but would greatly benefit from knowing a bit of HTML and CSS.
“We’re extremely excited about helping to change people’s image (and self-image) of who a coder is and actively encourage more girls to get into coding.” — Derek Lo
What would you say to skeptics who question whether a game-like application like Py can truly help people learn how to code properly?
Gamification isn’t a hindrance to learning—-it accelerates it. By keeping you excited and engaged, Py teaches you better than if you got bored or zoned out. When you’re having fun, you actually learn faster and better.
Another way to phrase this question might be, “Even if Py is fun, do you walk away having learned something from it?” The answer is yes, definitely. We’re very data-driven, constantly improving our courses by analyzing our users’ progress. We can see (and track) real progress in our users’ ability to understand everything from basic semantics to high-level algorithms and design principles.
Do you think Py’s game-like surface allows younger generations to become more involved with coding?
Yes. We specifically write our content using language that even young children can understand. In fact, a parent emailed us just the other day telling us he was using Py to teach his 10-year old son Python! Currently our target demographic is definitely a bit older than that though. We think of Py as the learn-to-code solution for the SnapChat generation.
What general skills does coding teach kids/ young adults?
Coding can provide people with the awesome ability of being able to create tangible things like websites and apps. It also instills less tangible things like a greater aptitude for systematic thinking and logical decision making.
“Once you understand how an algorithm works, typing it out should be an afterthought. The important thing is to understand it—once you do, it’s yours forever.” — Derek Lo
Py has recently partnered with Girls Who Code. Why do you think coding has been branded throughout history as a ‘male’ profession and how do you hope to eliminate this gender gap?
Historically some of the most important computer scientists are women. Ada Lovelace and Grace Hopper are considered pioneers of programming. Stereotypes aside, men and women are obviously equally capable of becoming great software engineers. We’re extremely excited about helping to change people’s image (and self-image) of who a coder is and actively encourage more girls to get into coding. We’re huge fans of Girls Who Code and we’re so excited to provide them free premium subscriptions for some of their students.
When we think of coding, we mostly envision computer screens, yet we tend to use our phones more often than we do our computers. How does Py bridge the gap between using a computer screen as opposed to learning how to code on smaller devices? Is the coding world shifting to using smartphones or is coding still a generally ‘computer’ based field?
People actually don’t need to type lots of code to learn the concepts necessary to become great programmers. We’ve built interaction types like “fill-in-the-blank” that let users quickly edit code on the fly without any typing. Recently we’ve also created a custom keyboard that allows users to type real code on their phones in a friction-less way. This is great for short programs and practicing the fundamentals, and it’s how we’re making the transition from computer to phone and vice versa easier. Applying this knowledge to create a website or app does still primarily take place on computers. But the world is seeing a wave of new mobile learning applications, and I think we’re at the forefront of that trend.
How do you envision the world of coding changing in the next 15-20 years? How will Py keep up with these changes in the field?
Coding will become less about rote memorization of basic syntax and more about high-level understanding of what’s really going on. At a minimum, programming languages have morphed from low-level (shifting bits and allocating memory) to high-level (abstract data structures and functional programming), from obtuse (assembly, machine code) to human friendly (Python, Swift).
That’s why Py focuses on high-level concepts. Once you understand how an algorithm works, typing it out should be an afterthought. The important thing is to understand it—once you do, it’s yours forever.
(l) C. M. Rubin & (r) Derek Lo
(All photos are courtesy of CMRubinWorld except featured image by J. Barker)
For the Silo, David Wine /CMRubinWorld with contributions by Zita Petrahai.
