Rupert Denton from ClickView talked about the possibilities of the ‘flipped classroom’, particularly in a context of an education system that is ‘failing’. (cue lots of graphs featuring PISA in full dive mode, alarm bells ringing, crew jettisoning ballast)
He cleverly used the work of Geoff Masters (what should we do to arrest the decline?), particularly ‘ensure every student has access to excellent teaching’, which aligned nicely to flipped classroom approaches.
It got a bit edgy when he compared the explosion in educational technology as a bit like the evolutionary explosion of life known as the Cambrian explosion.(see Wikipedia) He argued that, as in evolutionary terms, not all trees of life (or technology) will survive. One strand that he argued would survive is the ‘flipped classroom’.
Denton showed some of the emerging research around flipped learning (99% of teachers would use it again), one calling it ‘differentiation on steroids (Flipped Learning Network, 2012) and made several explicit links between ACER research and Flipped classroom approaches (flipped classrooms are shareable, so good teaching can be shared, and teachers can learn from other teachers about their own pedagogy.)
He then talked about the approach of ClickView in curating and gathering good content for Australian Curriculum approaches. He also shared some of the ‘value-add’ ClickView brings to video, like questions, annotations etc. as well as the teacher collaboration features that the platform has.
It was good to see this platform again and to see how some of the once competing threads of technology are coming together.
Rupert Denton is ‘a sceptical optimist’ who works for ClickView.
Well, maybe one of the things that emerges from this interesting conversation with gurus John Hattie and Pasi Sahlbert, that a colleague put me on to, is that perhaps we are being overly critical and pessimistic about what were doing in Australia. Maybe because pessimism and cynicism can serve a political agenda better than acknowledgement of successes?
Sahlberg talks about teacher quality, equity, funding and a range of other issues in a really reasonable way. I respect the work that Hattie’s done, but do you sense here that he’s talking down our system, and emphasizing his own agenda rather than listening to what he’s being told? He’s being told that Finland values teachers, respects teachers and pays them well, values teacher autonomy, doesn’t over-emphasise teaching … his action plan for Australia … well, it doesn’t really reflect that.
I’ve embedded the Apple announcement on text books below. I’ve already heard some negative reactions in the twittiverse arguing that this is another examples of Apple’s ‘walled garden’ approach, and that locking schools and districts into Apple systems entirely is not a good move. It seems there’s other questions too about whether these textbooks will be available on other platforms (unlikely) or available in other formats (very unlikely).
Nevertheless, I’m quite excited about it, particularly from a writer’s perspective. Could I write my textbook and have it on the Apple bookstore without the intermediary of the publisher? Like musicians do now? Could we break down the systems and empower good teachers and good teacher/authors and share their expertise more widely? And I’m definitely going to download the publication software.
But I have reservations, and they are more around the idea of the textbook in the first place. Maybe the textbook thing is bigger in the United States than here, or maybe because I’m an English teacher there isn’t generally the reliance on a textbook beyond the set novels and plays.
The video says they are going to change ‘one of the cornerstones of education: the textbook’. But is the textbook really that critical? How does this change learning? Or teaching? And, will replacing the traditional textbook with a ‘bells and whistles’ version change the classroom experience? Where are the collaborative tools, the feedback, the personalisation, the differentiation, the user-created textbook that we’ve talked about for some time.
There’s no doubt it will look pretty, it will save a lot of printing and heavy schoolbags for kids with iPads (oh yeah, how many is that right now?), they can be updated easily and they will be more engaging. But every time I hear ‘engagement’ as an argument for new software and hardware I cringe a little. There’s got to be better reasons than that. We shall see!