Skip to main content

The Great Content Debate

There has been a really interesting debate raging about 21st Century Skills and content in education. It seems that many in education think 21st Century Skills is counter to learning content. You can read about their views here:

http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/Bridging-Differences/2009/03/what_about_21st_century_skills.html

http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/03/flawed-assumptions-undergird-the-partnership-for-21st-century-skills-movement-in-education/

http://www.coreknowledge.org/blog/2009/02/25/21st-century-skills-fadbusters/

It is an interesting debate. Both sides make good points, but I find myself stuck in the middle. Why is teaching content counter to the goals of teaching 21st century skills? I for one can not question the need to learn deeply about a topic in order to have relevant arguments. I believe one must understand their topic in order to speak, write, or present on it. But where I believe 21st Century Skills is more than just a fad is in the way in which it shifts our understanding of how we access that content, process that content, and communicate our learning about that content.

There is no denying that content is more readily available today than ever before. However, that content is hiding amid millions of webpages, ads, and other distractions. If we don't teach our students how to effectively sift through the morass of information that bogs so many of us down, we will instead limit our students to either ignore the hordes of valuable information online or give equal value to all the content online. Handing kids a textbook and asking them to ignore the topical, thoughtful information that is available 24/7 is like teaching kids how to write essays on slate boards. It doesn't prepare them for the world they are already participating in.

The challenge we have as teachers is we are being asked to use tools that are essential to our students future, yet somewhat foreign to many of us. In addition, we are struggling to find the time to explore these tools to create meaningful opportunities for our students to learn how to use them. At the same time, we are feeling a great deal of pressure to get up to speed quickly. We don't want to feel responsible for ill-preparing our students.

One thing is for sure, content alone will not prepare our students for a world in which technology is changing the way we access information, connect with others socially and professionally, and organize our lives. On the other hand, technology skills alone will not prepare our students to make deep connections, solve meaningful problems, or communicate in significant ways.

We need both.

Photo Credit: http://payless4textbooks.com/Eric/SpryAssets/textbooks.gif

Comments

  1. Hi
    I don't think that anyone disagrees with your basic point--that we need both content and skills. (It would be pretty hard to make the case that we don't.) The argument is over whether the specific plan that P21 has put forward is going to deliver skills and content to students. I've argued that there are significant problems in the methods they advocate--that these methods sound plausible, even obvious, but they overlook some fundamentals about how the mind works. My argument dovetails well with that of Diane Ravitch, the historian. She basically says "Most or all of this has been tried before, and it didn't work." Content comes up a lot, because of this historical context--when similar plans didn't work in the past, it was frequently because content got jettisoned.
    So I think the P21 goals are great, but I think their plan is terrible.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dan-
    Thanks for your reply. I guess I am having trouble in this debate separating P21 from the general discussion of 21st Century Skills. I admit that the term has become watered down and lost meaning as we use it to represent all kinds of things. However, I think it is still worth pointing out that there are clearly some new skills that need to be addressed in order to better prepare our students for the future that awaits them. Technology both complicates and enriches our lives. Furthermore, it is fundamentally changing how we interact, communicate, and learn. As for skills like critical thinking, innovation, and problem solving, I agree that they have been around forever, but I would argue that we have allowed them to become overshadowed by basic skills recently. I also believe that new tools have changed the way we innovate, problem solve, and think critically. For example, online collaborative tools allow us to do these things with people across time and space. This has changed the way we share our ideas, gather input, build on other peoples' ideas, etc... Our students need these types of opportunities.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Dave, I was just reading this article emerging technologies in education. Sort of relates to this topic. Check out this link. http://ltc.umanitoba.ca/wikis/etl/index.php/Technology%2C_Teaching%2C_and_Learning#Introduction.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Wonderful World of Updates

As a SmartBoard district, we have many teachers using SmartBoards, Airliners, and, of course, Notebook software. So as a Notebook user, I am very excited about the new version 10 that has recently been released. It has many great new features which I will be sharing in later posts. However, as the primary trainer for users of Notebook software, this transition raises many questions about the value of updates. Many of our users are new to Smart Notebook software. I have trained about 100 people this year alone. Now I need to go back to them and tell them that this great tool I showed them is about to look quite different. To a third of them, this will be welcome news. They want the updates. They want the new features. They will pick it up quickly. To a second third, this will raise trepidation. Just when they are getting the hang of it, they go and change it. They will require a fair amount of support to bring them up to the same level of comfort with the new version. That leaves the re

How far out can we plan?

This has been coming up a lot lately in my conversations with teachers. Many of them want to know what is the plan for projectors, for SmartBoards, for computers on carts, etc... It is always a very tough conversation. Often, the answer is that the plan for the coming year is to complete putting projectors in classrooms. After that, there is no script for what to do. The reason? The minute you commit to a plan, you are stuck with it. Teachers expect it. If you need to change the plan, you upset a lot of people who have been patiently (?) waiting for their turn to get a particular piece of equipment. I don't blame them. I would feel the same way. The problem is that technology changes so quickly that to commit to doing something in two years is like playing the lottery. Every week I learn about some new technology that could potentially revolutionize the classroom. How can we commit to a piece of equipment then that might be obsolete by the time we purchase it. Instead, we need to a

Metamorphosis revisited

I posted before about metamorphosing in an evolving world. I want to revisit this idea. It has been bothering me that change seems to come so slow. There are many reasons for this, including leadership, state testing, resistance to change, resources, etc... But despite all of these factors, I truly believe that we can bring about more significant change. I'm not talking about technology, so much as I am talking about rethinking what we teach. While I see many teachers evolving (including myself), I think we are too painfully slow for the kinds of changes that need to take place. Photo by Morti Riuuallon http://www.flickr.com/photos/ultimorollo/2520525316/ The best way for us to metamorphose is to follow the example of the butterfly. The caterpillar starts by eating constantly. We, as teachers, need to consume information as if our future depended upon it. It does. We are becoming obsolete and our only chance of remaining relevant into the future is to understand it and adapt to i