21st century learning


linked to the future of our national wellbeing but the question is whether investments made have been wise or not. Education has always been a political football where each successive


change in administration brings new initiatives that by the nature of government are short term in their nature. I recently attended a meeting at Downing Street where the subject


was how to stimulate growth in an ailing economy. Economic recovery is dependent on growth more than an ongoing programme of cuts and austerity measures. But for growth to occur talent is required so I posited the question about where that talent would come from and where it would be nurtured, pointing at our education systems. The response was unsurprising but never-the-less illuminating. Investment in education was seen as too long term which really means that any administration seeks short term gains. Consequently investments in primary or secondary education that did not deliver useful results in the term of an administration are generally discounted in favour of knee-jerk, approval winning policies that bear little relation to achieving incremental improvements. We lack strategies that are directed at long term transformation


regardless of whether they would have signifi cant benefi ts to our national wellbeing and economic growth. So investment programmes that we have seen, regardless of whose


in power, have been directed at maintaining the status quo or simply making the old system more effective or more measurable. But it is the old system that is not working. So while we may get the same results just quicker they aren’t necessarily the results we need. The mistake is assuming that the world hasn’t changed. That the underlying foundation of our society, the economy, is the same as it was


“We lack strategies that are directed at long term transformation regardless of whether they would have signifi cant


benefi ts to our national wellbeing and economic growth.”


throughout the last century and since the last reboot of the education system in the Victorian era. Well just look around you. I would argue that our education systems need to refl ect and respond


to the changes that have occurred, and continue to occur, in our economic foundation. For those working in the primary education sector this has never been


more diffi cult given that we can only speculate about the world in which children entering primary school today will be entering by the time they leave full time education in the late 2020’s.


Wouldn’t your solution mean even more spending for schools? It could mean less or more depending upon what result we are seeking. At the moment, I think schools, especially primary, have an almost


impossible task with no clear direction from government apart from some basic measurements around numeracy and literacy that can be used as a metric by the tabloid media to make statements about education. But seldom do these metrics have much to do with learning. Governments meanwhile are continually driven by other metrics by unelected international agencies such as OECD with their equally arbitrary PISA measurements. What I’m suggesting is not so much an investment but a re-evaluation


about the purpose of schooling. Is there a difference between this and the purpose of learning? Because of my background in technology there is an assumption that


I’m proposing a technological overhaul of our education system but on the contrary: technology is something that happens after you’re born. Children entering primary education now are no older than Google, Facebook or YouTube. Many of them have younger siblings no older than the iPad. This isn’t technology to them. Recent market research showed that the number one gadget on the


2011 Christmas wish list for kids was the iPad, closely followed by the iPod touch and iPhone. Are we simply going to keep calm and carry on and pretend that the


21st century never happened? Or are we going to accept the media rich, facts at your fi nger tips world that this generation of kids are born into and respond accordingly?


20


If we ban the 21st century it is going to carry on regardless outside of the school gates.


Isn’t a lot of what you advocate already taking place in primary education? Yes and no. I’ve met some of the most exciting educators in the primary sector so something is definitely happening. But this is continually tempered by the fact that the unwritten rule is that primary education’s role is to prepare pupils for secondary education which, of course, is driven by universities and employers. But by the time primary school kids reach universities or employers these organisations either won’t exist or they’ll be radically different.


Why is creativity in school so important in your thinking? Here’s the thing. Africa and the Middle East have the natural resources. China has the manufacturing. What does Europe and America have if it doesn’t have creative innovators? Innovation is by nature disruptive but what education systems embrace


disruptive, creative, thinking? We must also consider that as a society we have bigger challenges


ahead. Our planet has now passed the seven billion population mark yet we are wholly reliant on natural resources for our survival as a species. Who will solve these challenges if not the children entering our education systems today? Industrial scale education systems have become factories not for


learning but for the output of productive forces for a bygone age. But what if we set specifi c goals for these forces based around sustainability, renewable resources, wellbeing and prosperity? Creativity is not a subject, it is something that should be embedded


across any curriculum. Maths, for example, is not a dead subject, it is full of creativity and


discovery if only it was allowed to break free of the tyranny of irrelevance to our learners lives.


Many parents will have deep concerns about younger children having access to mobile devices. How can you address this? Parents of young children today almost certainly own a mobile phone, many will have a Facebook page, a game console and a satnav and be active users of the internet. These technologies may not have changed their lives entirely but they have become embedded in their lives. Is it such a leap of imagination to expect that they would want their children to understand and engage with these 21st century technologies for the benefi t of their learning? There has been understandable concern around digital safety but the


world that our children are growing up in is not going away any more than the roads outside their schools. Like road safety it is vital that our children learn and understand the issues around digital safety but this shouldn’t prevent them using the digital highway. As author Ray Kurzweil once said, “mobile phones are misnamed,


they should be called the gateways to all human knowledge” and by this he means that what we once called a phone is, for a child, a personal access device to learning and knowledge where entire encyclopaedias are available at the tap of a screen. But let’s not get carried away. There are many pressures on parents, especially those living in the inner cities, that are raising their children in


Forward thinking: Graham Brown-Martin, founder of Learning Without Frontiers


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40