Learning & Leading Through Technology

Here’s what other ISTE members had to say about this topic. Participate in our reader poll at iste.org/LL.

YES

52%

with others. This often means putting
aside our individual needs. We don’t
usually get to choose our colleagues,
preferred learning style, schedule, or
how our work is assessed.
Clearly, educators should care about
the individual needs of their students.
We may wish to nurture individual tal-
ent, creativity, even genius. To that end,
some individualized education is ap-
propriate. But as a technology-focused
educator, I am most excited about tools
that enable us to work together and col-
laborate in new and innovative ways.

—Michael Peters is the upper school digital learning facilitator at the International School of Prague. Prior to that, he was a technology integration specialist at the American School of Guatemala and an elementary school teacher in Canada.

• We should continually ask at the local,
regional, and national levels if we’re
doing all we can to deliver high-quality
learning experiences for students.
Personalizing education doesn’t
mean making it less authentic or over-
ly simplistic. I’m not convinced that
we—or the technology—are there yet
to do the idea service. But if personal-
ized learning can positively influence
student engagement during the for-
mative years, we’d at least be preparing
them for a lifelong openness to curios-
ity and enlightenment.

— John Hendron received the Making IT Happen Award in December 2012 from the Virginia Society for Technology in Education. He’s a doctoral candidate in education leadership at Virginia Commonwealth University, USA.

Personalization by the People, for the People

The best teachers have always personalized. They learn about students as individuals, understanding their backgrounds as humans and as stores of prior knowledge. They expose them to a variety of challenges to help them discover their gifts and practice skills. They design curriculum that appeals to student interests. But the “personalization” movement put forth by corporate educators removes the teacher-student relationship. This may be work done independently, but it is hardly “personal.”

J. D. Ferries-Rowe Chief Information Officer Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Computers Keep Pace

Among the most persuasive criticisms of contemporary education is that students are kept in lockstep with one another. Time is a constant, not a variable, and at the end of a unit of instruction it’s time to move on, regardless of whether or not all students have mastered a topic. Thus some students who are able to move ahead faster are throttled back, while those who struggle may fall further behind. Computers, equipped with mastery learning logic, can pace instruction to match that of individual learners with infinite patience.

Steve Taffee Consultant, Education Collaborators San Francisco, California, USA

Customization Is Not Personalization Personalized learning and customization are different. Personalized learning starts with learners taking responsibility for their learning. Customization takes control of the learning out of the learners’ hands. Using algorithms based on summative data and clicks does not support learners taking responsibility for their learning. The learner does not own their learning if an algorithm ensures each student is learning in his or her educational “sweet spot.” Learners need to find their own “sweet spot” so they cope with challenge, persist past failure, learn in new ways, and adapt skills and style as they collaborate with other team members.

Barbara Bray and Kathleen McClaskey Co-Founders, Personalize Learning, LLC Amherst, New Hampshire, USA

Customize Until We Can Personalize

Our role as educators is to prepare our students for living in the 21st century. Until learners control their own learning, we have to do everything to customize their learning so that they have all the opportunities they need to learn, unlearn, and relearn.

Jenny Middleton Director of Curriculum and Professional Practice Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Don’t Give Them More Than They Can Handle I agree with keeping the freedom to choose learning paths in the hands of the student, were it not for the failure of so many students. The character to succeed is not necessarily widespread in today’s children, as they come from a range of homes. Yet the natural drive to find one’s own path and succeed as a learner is inherent in each child from birth. Many would benefit from being kept in the zone of proximal development as they construct their knowledge and skills.

Thomas Johanson Teacher Houston, Texas, USA

The Enemy of Control

It is easier for governments to design learning to not be too personalized, as it allows for statistical analysis of national and international testing to give a singular perspective to control and assess all learning. If we wish to control learning, then the answer to the question “Can learning be too personalized?” is yes. If we wish to design for meaningful learning, then the answer to the question is most definitely not.

Daithí Ó Murchú Principal Teacher, Director of Methodologies Dublin, Leinster, Ireland

Out of the Void

Humans do not live in a community of one. We live in relationship with others: families, friends, co-workers, and strangers. My concern with the focus on personalized learning to the extreme is the loss of shared experiences. Learners in a void do not have the opportunity to engage others in shared discourse. This hinders the reflective elements of learning, which encourage innovative articulations of thought.