Going out on a limb, I will comment some here on the book before finishing reading Charles Murray’s Real Education. So far (I am up to page 66), Murray is saying strong, accurate, and needed things about education as it is today and is clearing up false views about altering the “academic ability” of students. But will his analysis hold true when learning shifts fundamentally to the Internet? I don’t think so because the idea of “academic ability” will lose meaning when schools (academies) no longer organize study subjects and patterns by which students learn.
The real education of the future will be unbundled, and schools will no longer regulate and standardize knowledge. Study subjects will be emergent from the open Internet and directly engaged and learned by individual students. That is a compete change for the schools we have now where students are offered knowledge selected by schools and standards writers and delivered in graded hierarchies. On page 61 of Real Education is this sample of many similar sentences: Fourth-graders at the 25th percentile increased their mean score by three points between 2002 and 2007.
When education is unbundled, such a sentence will not make sense. Kids will no longer be bundled by grade and subjects will no longer be shoehorned into hierarchies to mesh with grades.
With the unbundling of education that is now underway, should we have schools? That is the question where we should begin. I’ll bet Murray will have some important insight into this as I keep reading. I’ll let you know in future posts.
Real education will be unbundled
1 comment
Posted on 21st August 2008 by Judy Breck in Uncategorized
academic_ability, Book comments, Charles_Murray, Learning Handbook, Real Education, C Murray, Real_Education, schools
Going out on a limb, I will comment some here on the book before finishing reading Charles Murray’s Real Education. So far (I am up to page 66), Murray is saying strong, accurate, and needed things about education as it is today and is clearing up false views about altering the “academic ability” of students. But will his analysis hold true when learning shifts fundamentally to the Internet? I don’t think so because the idea of “academic ability” will lose meaning when schools (academies) no longer organize study subjects and patterns by which students learn.
The real education of the future will be unbundled, and schools will no longer regulate and standardize knowledge. Study subjects will be emergent from the open Internet and directly engaged and learned by individual students. That is a compete change for the schools we have now where students are offered knowledge selected by schools and standards writers and delivered in graded hierarchies. On page 61 of Real Education is this sample of many similar sentences: Fourth-graders at the 25th percentile increased their mean score by three points between 2002 and 2007.
When education is unbundled, such a sentence will not make sense. Kids will no longer be bundled by grade and subjects will no longer be shoehorned into hierarchies to mesh with grades.
With the unbundling of education that is now underway, should we have schools? That is the question where we should begin. I’ll bet Murray will have some important insight into this as I keep reading. I’ll let you know in future posts.