The Future of Education & The Future of School Are on Very Different Paths

A few weeks ago I posted this passing thought on Twitter that I was not quite ready to come back to at the time but seemed to get a little traction:

@anderscj
anderscjDoes anyone else get the feeling that the future of education & the future of school are on very different paths. 20 days ago via Mobile Web · powered by @socialditto

Then, last night as I was about to finish reading Larry Cuban's (2001) Oversold and Underused: Computers in the Classroom Jerrid Kruse asked me this question on Twitter:

@jerridkruse
Jerrid Kruse@anderscj you liking cuban's work? 15 hours ago via Twitter for iPhone · powered by @socialditto

to which I replied:

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse I wouldn't say I like it so much as I agree with most of it. 15 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse Cuban presents an inconvenient truth. 15 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

Cuban basically explains why, despite unprecedented access to technology, such reforms have failed to make foundational changes in schools. In Cuban's account the reasons for such high investment in tech tools in schools has been: 1. To make students more digitally literate, and 2. To shift from a teacher-centric to a student-centered learning environment. In his account he lists numerous teachers and programs that do this but shows how they are not the norm. What these tools end up doing is reinforcing already established teaching practices instead of transforming them. Among the many explanations he gives he includes school heritage, public conceptions, flawed decision-making, conflicting policy, and reformer misunderstanding of the purpose of school.

Before reading this book I thought Larry Cuban and Seymour Papert were on opposite ends of the ideological spectrum, Papert a tech-enthusiast and Cuban who near the end of this book calls for schools to cease spending money on computers:

"Contemporary reformers have forgotten the democratic mission at the heart of public schooling, ignored the critical importance of social capital in strengthening civic behaviors, and proven too narrowly committed to technocratic solutions of school problems—all of which tempts me to call for a moratorium on buying any more computers for K-12 schools." Cuban

But now I realize they are closer to being on the same page than I thought. Reading between the lines on these pages it is obvious that the kind of transformation, the kind of change in the classroom that Cuban was hoping to find was akin to the kind of constructionist tech-enhanced project-based learning Papert observed with children in their use of LOGO to learn math. But, what he found was no such transformation on any measurable scale.

One thing Cuban hints at but doesn't give much weight to are the places where computer technology has revolutionized learning. He recognizes that the places where teachers and professors most use technology is in preparing for lessons and that students who knew a lot about computers learned most about them at home or in a part-time job. These are places where the personal computer has been used as a personal learning device, where the learning supports the learner's own goals and not the goals set forth by a teacher or curriculum. The technology-enhanced learning revolution has happened, its just left schools behind.

So, lets explore a few examples of this. First, how many teachers who engage in "PLNs" say that they find their social media engagement with other educators more valuable than the school or district-sponsored professional development programs? It is odd for a day to go by without me seeing at least one Tweet expressing this sentiment. A quick search in Twitter for "PLN," "Love," and "PD" drew these responses:

@ccampbel14
Cathy Campbell@wrice1978 I use Twitter for daily learning & connecting with global educators. I love my math PLN that spans the globe! #sfssepsb 5 hours ago via TweetGrid.com · powered by @socialditto

@BobToms100
BobTomsI love my PLN, esp. during #ukedchat I will try my best here, esp. against the odds. Education & needs is not fully understood by many here. 5 days ago via TweetDeck · powered by @socialditto

@CTuckerEnglish
Catlin TuckerLet's use PD as an opportunity to talk to teachers about how to develop their own PLN to keep the learning happening all year. #edchat 4 hours ago via TweetDeck · powered by @socialditto

@thereadingzone
Sarah Thanks to Twitter I have made some amazing friends and my PLN is ever-growing. I learn more on Twitter than from any PD I pay for... 2 days ago via web · powered by @socialditto

@1olballcoach
Jon KrugThanks to all the tweets! Have new "converts" to the world of twitter and its PD and PLN uses! Good Stuff! #sschat #psychat 6 days ago via TweetDeck · powered by @socialditto

@Akee123
Rob AckermanDoes anyone have a sample certificate of completion for a teacher participating in a PLN? Our district is exploring this PD option #edchat 7 days ago via Twitter for iPad · powered by @socialditto

Also, one could look at the rise in homeschooling and unschooling as a result of greater access to personal learning tools at home. Its not that computers and the Internet cause homeschooling, unschooling, and dropouts, it just enables and empowers them to feel this is a viable choice. I have spoken with many families over the past two years who have cited how important the Internet is for their homeschooling and unschooling. And this is not to say that the Internet can do what a teacher can't. Many unschoolers hire teachers when they feel they need them. The technology does not replace teachers, it makes it possible to do away with school and empower students to take control of their own learning.


Regardless of whether you believe Digital Natives and Immigrants exist or not I think Marc Prensky accurately illustrates the problem in this video:

"Education has biforcated completely into school where you get a credential and its about the past and and after school where you really learn interesting stuff on your own." Prensky

And Sugata Mitra proposes a plausible role of learning and schooling in this video:


Perhaps this is also why when asked last year about how social media and mobile technologies are changing teaching and learning in schools S. Craig Watkins said he and his colleagues at the Digital Youth Project are more interested in studying how students are using these tools at home.

Now take examples of teachers who work in what John Holt would term S-chools who have managed to transform teaching and learning with technology in their classrooms. How many of them have done so by deschooling their classrooms? I think Clay Burrell, who often talks with distaste about schooly things, is an excellent example:

Part 1---------Part 2

(This presentation requires Microsoft Silverlight. Click here to install.

It seems pretty obvious to me that in order to achieve the kind of learning revolution in schools that computer technology "reformers" sought that teachers must deschool their classrooms. But, to do so teachers bump up against a wall that Cuban doesn't mention in his book but a commenter on Scott McLeod's blog touches on. Sam Fancera writes:

Scott – Many of us don’t do this on a large scale, because many of us are evaluated solely on our students standardized test results. I agree that we should emphasize hands-on inquiry, critical thinking, and collaboration, but until the reliance on test scores for evaluative purposes are modified we will not make a full press.

I would take this a step further and say that it is not just the evaluation based on test scores that is the problem but many of us are also evaluated on how well we follow a teaching routine set forth for us by our schools. In my current school we are obligated to use the workshop model of 10-15 minutes direct instruction followed by 20-30 minutes of individual or group work ending with a 5-10 minute closing. This alone hinders the kind of learning that technology can enhance because it sets up the teacher as the one who controls the classroom curriculum, who asks the questions, and who tells students what they should do with their 20-30 minutes in-between. Even if this expectation were not explicitly stated, as it had never been in any of the other schools I worked in, it is always implied. I have yet to have an administrator I work for who understands the kind of learning that can occur when you allow this kind of transformation to take place. And, even if I did work for an administrator who understood, the expectations carried by past administrators and classroom evaluators is enough to shock me back into traditional teaching mode.

Yesterday I wrote this comment on McLeod's blog that I think I will repost here because it more clearly describes this problem:

Shelley Owen Reply January 6, 2012 at 7:56 am

My son, a high school senior reading this right next to me, says, “Right on! This is so true.” He is no slacker at school; his grades are excellent. However, we both know how little he really has to do to score well on any test. It’s almost laughable.

Carl Anderson Reply January 9, 2012 at 4:12 pm

Shelley,

What is more laughable is how little tests can really measure. But what brings me to tears is the weight we are forced to put on something which means so little. And what drives me crazy is having to defend over and over again how ignoring the tests and focusing on personally meaningful projects leads to better learning, is more rigorous, and ultimately will lead to better test scores. And what drives me absolutely stark raving mad is trying to explain to school managers (and often to other teachers) that such authentic learning is the result of negotiation and dialog with the learner and cannot be done through pre-planned scripted lessons or teacher-driven assessments.

A teacher’s job ought to be to help children learn. Instead, too often, the teacher’s job performance is assessed not only on how well students perform on a test that narrowly measures what a student knows but also on how closely they follow a script and stick to their lesson plans. If the goal is optimal learning then the very best teachers know their lessons cannot be scripted, they cannot be pre-written, they cannot be programmed. The optimal lesson plan is one that is written on-the-fly and responds to student needs and questions, not some common core standardized curriculum that dictates what and when each student should learn certain things.

In my classroom I ask very few questions. I make my students do most of the asking. Their questions guide what we do in class and what we learn. They ask the questions they are ready to wrestle with and are relevant to them at the time they are ready to have them answered. If the curriculum is truly important the student’s questions will lead us to it. Usually it does. Aside from that I load their environment, both physical and digital, with enough curiosities to spark the kinds of questions I would hope they would ask. The questions I ask most frequently are, “What do you want to learn about?” and “How can I help you today?” But, justifying this methodology to school managers who see learning as synonymous with knowledge and knowledge as something that can be handed down from teacher to student as if they were empty vessels waiting to be filled is hard if not impossible. Consequently, I often get comments when observed like, “I don’t understand what is going on here but I wouldn’t ask you to change it.” to “what you are doing is incredible but you need to work on….” and then they hand me the Charlotte Danielson rubric clearly outlining the things they didn’t observe in my class. I’ve come to realize that very few people in charge of most schools and most departments of education know much about how people actually learn. We are required to post our lesson objectives on the board. Mine always reads: Students will set their own goals and work toward achieving them. And those two students playing video games in the corner, they made those games but did anyone who came to observe bother to ask?

I am starting to wonder how much longer I can find a place in this profession where I can do what I do. But then what we assess today isn’t doing anyway. Doing and do-ers are on the way out. How many industrial technology, family and consumer science, art, music, drama, creative writing, poetry, graphic design, and computer programming courses are there anymore? Where they do exist they exist as places where students mostly study others doing, not doing themselves. We don’t want doers, we want consumers. We can pay workers in China $150/month to do our doing. At least if the students do well on that standardized test we will know that they have consumed the curriculum and objectives someone else set for them.

My conversation with Jerrid last night ended this way:

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse Cuban presents an inconvenient truth. 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@jerridkruse
Jerrid Kruse@anderscj yes, IMO he & postman Make clear that tech simply doesn't matter, teaching/teachers do. 17 hours ago via Twitter for iPhone · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse technology may in some ways improve learning but mostly as personal tools...to improve unstructured learning, not schooling. 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse Cuban, for me, supports my building hypothesis that the tech-enhanced learning renaissance is leaving schools behind.... 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@jerridkruse
Jerrid Kruse@anderscj can you explain that hypothesis? 17 hours ago via Twitter for iPhone · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse technology may in some ways improve learning but mostly as personal tools...to improve unstructured learning, not schooling. 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse tech helps us learn things better we normally wouldn't go to school to learn 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@jerridkruse
Jerrid Kruse@anderscj that makes a lot of sense. 17 hours ago via Twitter for iPhone · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse and for those who are able, tech helps those who want to learn on their own and in their own way 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@jerridkruse
Jerrid Kruse@anderscj able & have means. 17 hours ago via Twitter for iPhone · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse yes. And those teachers who have managed to allow tech transform tchng & lrng do so by deschooling their classrooms.... 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

@anderscj
anderscj@jerridkruse ....something those without means consistently say they don't want for their children. 17 hours ago via Twitterrific · powered by @socialditto

Rules, Regulations, & Initiatives vs. Environmental Interventions

A few weeks ago I had an interesting conversation with a good friend of mine, Scott Schwister, who told me about a story he heard about underground or unlicensed illegal preschool daycare centers in New York. Evidently the cost of preschool tuition has risen so high that a growing trend has been for many families to band together and run their own preschools in each others homes. Officially these schools do not exist but in practice they do. On the surface this didn't seem to be all that interesting of a story except that it seems to support or coalesce with some other thoughts I have had recently.

It seems like whenever we try to solidify something too much; whenever we over-regulate something; whenever we try to define something too closely, that which gets left out or is made to be dissident finds a way to subversively exist anyway. Therefore, if we want a behavior or practice to cease, banning it will never work. If we want kids to stop putting gum under their desks the answer is not to ban gum, banning it will likely not solve this problem, the gum will end up there anyway but detecting it will be harder on our parts because the kids who want to chew gum bad enough will find new ways of hiding it from us. If we want kids to stop using cell phones in the classroom the answer is not to ban cell phones, banning cell phones will only force students to find more covert ways to use them. If we want to make sure everyone who practices medicine is competent, the answer is not to raise the standards by which one becomes eligible, such a policy will only cause a scarcity in the market, drive up healthcare costs, and force people to seek out alternative treatment.

Around the same time I had this conversation with Scott I also saw this story on The Young Turks:



This story clearly depicts yet another example of an undesirable behavior taking place due to a false scarcity created by regulation. I don't support what this rogue sperm donor is doing but I do acknowledge that this exists simply because of regulations that are supposed to prevent it.

This same issue is at the heart of the unending abortion debate as well as the war on drugs. There are countless documented cases of illegal abortions that have occurred in our past in times when the act was strictly forbidden and today even most Republicans and Democrats agree that the war on drugs has been a huge failure.



The answer to all of these issues is not one of regulation but one of environment. If we create the conditions where people will choose not to do drugs, not to have abortions, not to need rogue sperm donors, not to need to use unlicensed preschools, etc. then we go much further toward achieving the goals our rules and regulations were designed to achieve.

For the past two years I have been intrigued by the rise in both homeschooling and unschooling. This rules vs. environment concept when applied to this topic lends an interesting perspective. We hear all the time about how high the dropout rate is in this country. By some accounts it is nearly 33%. Dropouts do not cease to learn, learning is a natural human behavior, they simply cease being schooled. What percentage of that 33% could be considered unschoolers? What percentage of those who drop out drop out for reasons that have to do with regulations that make staying in school unbearable? What percentage of those who register as homeschoolers are really unschooling? According to both John Holt and Grace Llewellyn that number is pretty high. Could both the high dropout rate and the rise in homeschooling be indicators that something we are doing to schools is having the same effect as the others I mentioned above?

If we focused on creating environments that kids would want to choose rather than loading our schools full of restrictive policies and if didn't over-regulate the curriculum, didn't make school so much pressure for both students and teachers, if we didn't set the path of learning down for students instead of letting them find their own way, if we didn't setup school to be a game of winners and losers competing for high marks, would we have such high figures of both homeschoolers and dropouts? Could a large part of this 33% simply represent a section of our population who have rejected this idea that we ought to be competing and progressing? And, what of specialization, categorization, labels? Our school policies, how they are run, how they are legislated, and the purposes they serve make them absolutely loaded with over-regulation. In this way these institutions are just like the Cider House Rules.


Its not just the "thou shalt not" policies that have this effect but the "thou shalt" policies are equally as problematic. One place in schools we see this effect all the time is with school and district initiatives. We get these all the time. If a school wants to promote something administrators will have initiatives. BYOD initiatives, 1:1 initiatives, mobile learning initiatives, etc. Usually these initiatives come down as mandates, as add-ons to the normal practice of teaching and learning. And, quite often they are mandated even in places where they do not exactly fit. What we end up with is unnatural adoption. Rather than allowing something to happen because it is a good fit (i.e. allowing the use of cell phones in projects where they are beneficial for learning) initiatives tend to force the adoption of a tool or practice even where it is not a good fit. In the end this causes more harm than good for whatever cause the initiative was trying to support. Many teachers will say, I tried it and it didn't work, we would rather go back to banning this than to keep up with this initiative.


I like to think of the initiative issue in sculptural terms. There are basically three types of sculpture: additive, subtractive, and modeling. An initiative is an additive approach to policy. It adds something to an already built structure in hopes that its addition will force a positive change. At times this is the correct approach but more often than not it backfires. On the other hand we could take subtractive approaches. Michelangelo was famous for saying that when carving stone he didn't create the sculptures, he just removed all the stone that wasn't part of them. The same approach can be used with school policy. If we want a BYOD program in our schools the most natural way to go about it is simply to allow it. Remove any policy restrictions that are preventing it from taking place. In the long run this will force a more natural change. Instead of forcing the hand of teachers to integrate something without questioning whether or not it is appropriate to do so the subtractive policy approach forces teachers to find ways to deal with the presence of student-owned devices. This makes the integration of a technology far more authentic and likely to have more longevity.

One problem is that there is a lot of money out there to support initiatives. But, no one will award a grant for a subtraction. Therefore we end up with reform after reform, initiative after initiative, that fail to take hold long-term. In the case of technology integration, to quote Larry Cuban, "Computers meet school, school wins."


The flipped classroom is another example of the rules & regulations vs. environmental intervention/additive vs. subtractive issue playing out. For a number of months there has been quite a lot of debate online about the use of tools like Kahn Academy as well as teacher-created videos to replace lectures. These videos in and of themselves are not harmful and in many cases can support student learning. But, I think what most opponents are arguing against is their imposition in classrooms as initiatives, as another additive policy. Kahn cannot replace a teacher who can actually interact with students and it is true that the kind of teaching that is used in Kahn academy videos supports a very traditional and somewhat bland style of teaching. But, it is a useful resource to have on hand much in the same way as I might have a series of textbooks or reference materials on my shelf. With Kahn and the flipped classroom the issue of initiative funding is even more pronounced since the Gates Foundation is throwing so much support behind the idea. In this case, as in so many others, funding a basically good idea and turning it into an initiative will likely kill it. Flipped classrooms will end up with the same fate as so many other school reforms that have gone out to pasture.


I could go on and on with more and more examples of how rules, regulations & initiatives, both prohibitive and supportive, muck things up and usually end up with an outcome in opposition of their goals. The point is that what works to change behavior are not rewards and punishments, but changes in the environment that allow people to make the right decisions. If we want students to benefit from a flipped classroom allow it as an acceptable teaching and learning strategy. If we want to increase student access to more personalized technology allow them to bring their devices. If we want fewer students to drop out of school make schools better and more humane places. If we want fewer abortions make social and economic changes that will make a young mother feel more confident that they are supported in having and raising a child. If we want people to use less drugs change the environment to make them happier more content people to begin with. How do you create change? You create conditions that allow it to happen.

Twitter Book Club: John I. Goodlad (1979) What Schools Are For - Chapter 5

"Parents rate their school higher and trust the decisions of local principals and teachers more when they (cont) http://tl.gd/68ie8tless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

This is exactly the problem find with how the whole national conversation about education, catalyzed by the film "Waiting for Superman," and propagated by NBC's devotion to a national conversation about education with their "Education Nation" project. It is what prompted me to post these four Tweets:

Education has always been a local issue. If NBC is serious about affecting change they should bring #educationnation 2 local affiliates.less than a minute ago via Twitterrificanderscj
anderscj

Education Policy conversations at a national level tend to miscategorize what really goes on in schools. #educationnationless than a minute ago via Twitterrificanderscj
anderscj

On a national platform it is too easy to show 1 ex of poor schooling & use it to generalize about all public schools. #educationnationless than a minute ago via Twitterrificanderscj
anderscj

@NBC bring #educationnation 2 your local affiliates & host discussions about schools locally with people who actually work in & with them.less than a minute ago via Twitterrificanderscj
anderscj

"Schools must possess the authority and freedom essential to exercising [the] responsibility [for the quality of its own existence]."Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

When external agencies impose accountability assessments and prescriptive solutions to poor results it undermines this fundamental condition for their success. It is, like Chinese Handcuffs, the counter-intuitive solution that solves the problem.

"We must reverse the trend of assigning most of the authority to remote levels of the education system, (cont) http://tl.gd/68ih6uless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"The healthy school has a sense of mission, identity, and wholeness that pervades every aspect of its functioning." Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

I believe so very strongly in this. If schools are allowed, or required, to be viewed as simply resources available to help the public along they will not be successful. They will, and I have seen this happen, wither like a dead branch on a tree and die. I think it is also true for any learning community, not just schools. This effect can be achieved around more than just an institution. Look at the successful online learning communities in our PLNs. That sense of mission can be different for individual members in a learning community but each person must bring this quality out and show it.

In successful schools, "the principal is a person with a strong sense of personal worth and potency, who (cont) http://tl.gd/68ijf9less than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"When people appear to be carrying chains not of their own forging and are willing and able to perform more (cont) http://tl.gd/68ilpaless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

Yet another good argument for the elimination of standardized testing and value-added assessment.

"the criterion of accountability for the principal is based on the development of a comprehensive (cont) http://tl.gd/691psgless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

I agree with this statement only in so far as the principal is given the authority that allows them to be responsible for this. Too often this authority is taken away because of externally imposed mandates and the depletion of resources. This statement lies at the heart of equity issues in public schools.

"the [successful] principal purges from his or her mind those views of instruction that offer panaceas and simple solutions." Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"When students are Involved in and excited about what they are doing (to the extent of being immune to (cont) http://tl.gd/691rvgless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"This involvement occurs, regardless of the techniques of external motivation employed, when the subject (cont) http://tl.gd/691sujless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

Would it be a copyright infringement to print these two quotes on t-shirts and posters and sell them to teachers? I want to put these quotes somewhere all teachers will see them everyday when they go into work.

"A mastery approach to learning, as recommended by Benjamin Bloom, within a nongraded structure offers much (cont) http://tl.gd/6921arless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

I think the term mastery in the last couple years has been co-opted to mean "teach harder." When I teach middle and high school students I teach for mastery by giving feedback on projects and assignments, giving them back to students to continue to work on, and not accepting their work until they have mastered it. In the process often we have to change course in the approach to attaining mastery based on individual student needs. What I have been hearing lately when the term "mastery" has been employed has been more akin to the increased drilling of rote memorization techniques until the student can repeat lists. I saw a good example of this false mastery on MSNBC's Education Nation on Monday when they brought out a KIPP math teacher to show how he teaches factors. What he did was simply rewrite a T-payne song so students could more easily memorize the factors of various numbers. This is not mastery. How many of those kids could list for you the factors of the numbers in the song but not know what they mean? Teaching for mastery involves teaching for understanding and to attain it a student must also want to master the content. Teaching for mastery starts with the student internalizing the learning objective and the teacher guiding them to attaining them. Mastery is a responsive, not reactionary pedagogy.

"Management may be part of leadership, but management alone is no substitute for leadership." Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"Interestingly (60 or 70 years ago) principals were viewed more as head teachers than as administrators and not at all as managers." Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

When I first read Goodlad five years ago this quote stuck with me. Actually, since the book was written in the late 70s the actual quote says 30-40 years, I have updated it. I believe strongly any effective reform of our schools today must strive to reclaim this. Move principals closer to the business of education.

"for far too many school administrators, learning and teaching no longer are at the core of their daily existence." Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"the improvement of curriculum and instruction calls for delayed gratification." Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"Our work, for which we will always be held accountable, is to develop, justify, maintain, and articulate (cont) http://tl.gd/692cdfless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

"Improving the schools we have does not require new legislation, sweeping innovation, massive infusion of (cont) http://tl.gd/692fjkless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

Why do so few people understand this? Don't we have enough data about the effectiveness of these failed approaches to make a data-driven decision to stop these practices?

"Improvements beyond the cosmetic are more likely to occur if several schools are joined in a network for (cont) http://tl.gd/692hhmless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj

This seems to be a recurring theme in the books printed before the rise of the WWW that I have been reading for Twitter Book Club. Goodlad, Dewey, Illich, Papert, and Freire have all, in their pre-Internet texts, called for the need for and the potential power of a network of teachers, or PLN, to make change in schools. In many ways, Twitter Book Club is an homage to them and an appropriate medium in which to honor them.

"The creation of an educative society may call for less schooling as we know it now, or more in some places and less in others." Goodladless than a minute ago via Twittelatoranderscj
anderscj