Guy Kawasaki, who worked for Apple and Steve Jobs said, "Apple Market research is an oxymoron. If you ask people what they want they'll tell you "Better, faster and cheaper"-- that is better sameness, not revolutionary change." Jobs himself was quoted as saying, "A lot of times, people don't know what they want until you show it to them."
In education I hear this sentiment a lot lately: "Involve and engage all stakeholders." That sounds lovely. Why wouldn't we want input for parents and the community? All stakeholders in this case probably means every parent and taxpayer. That's a lot of people with a lot of ideas about what school should look like. There's a desire to be transparent and be collaborative. These are words I use with great frequency to describe learning. But I'm beginning to question these ideas when it comes to making bold moves in education.
I think of Zac Chase's tongue-in-cheek post a few months back about turning off his phone on the plane. He writes about whether turning off your phone will or won't impact the flight:
But I don’t know.
And that’s the key.
I don’t understand the system. Aviation, engineering, electronics - all these are outside the areas of my expertise.
In this system, I have an amazing amount at stake. I am thoroughly invested and committed to its success.
Entire sub-systems and interactions are beyond my understanding. Thus, I keep my mouth shut. If I decided to study aeronautics, become familiar with everything involved in the process of moving a plane from one side of the country to another, then would I have a space to speak up.
When my life and the lives of others are on the line, it’s probably best not to disrupt a system I do not understand.
I see all the ways in which flying planes and running a for-profit business is NOT like a public school. They don't have a public directly paying for all kids. And yet, like Zac, I try to show some humility when it comes to many government decisions. I vote for people I think will represent me well and wait 4 or 5 years to assess and determine if I think they should continue their work or not. We have many people very invested in education who are very knowledgeable. However, when it comes to envisioning something new and different it's more than just fear that holds them back, it's ignorance. I don't say that in a demeaning way. I say that in the same way I don't understand many systems and don't spend anytime envisioning and experimenting with new ideas. Add to that those that don't care.
So as the conversation and dreams of a new place of learning happens in staff rooms and even district offices, who should really be involved in that process? I'm well aware that in many cases, these conversations are not happening but I have been part of these in schools, in our district and even at the provincial level. In these discussions, the topic of stakeholders always comes up. Even suggesting students be part of the conversation. My caution is that depending on the students, they too aren't seeing and picturing many new ideas. I realize that it's our job to engage students and parents in conversations like this but at some point, someone needs to do something. Maybe without full consensus.
Will we really be able to create something awesome by asking people what they want? I think the average parent, taxpayer, student and even the average teacher just wants a system that's better. Higher "student achievement" (i.e. test scores) and lower dropouts. If schools did this, most people would be happy. But I know I wouldn't necessarily want those things. We can do better, we have to do better. I'm looking to be part of creating something different and I don't think it can involve all stakeholders.
Follow Dean Shareski on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Shareski
How do I know?
Observing the last 15 years of education reform and budget cuts.
But alas, people care too much about looking important.
hit the nail on the head. this is why we need leaders and not simply 'representatives'. a leader has the courage, knowledge and foresight to change people's minds instead of simply adapting to the community's whims.
In education policy this is especially important as the community has virtually no accurate understand of how education works.
As far as the political nature of education reform, I think most politicians are more than willing to simply follow the lead of the activist reformers who themselves dont know any better. In some rare cases, I expect they've evaluated the risk of actually standing up for the children and realized its a losing battle in the face of those activist reformers, so they'd rather be on the 'winning' side than the right side. too bad.
The second problem is developing institutional strategies to address the needs of students who come to school one or more years behind. These students arrive at kindergarten with limited vocabularies and limited phonic awareness. If we want them to catch up, they need more time learning, and the earlier that happens, the better.
The difference is that Jobs was talking about things (and was quite ruthless about the way he was earning money with them) and in education we are talking about people (I may hope). Out-of-the-box thinking in educational innovation is very welcome, but involving people/stakeholders in how to implement them is welcome too, if not neccesary to have any effect.
Willem Spee
The Netherlands
I understand that it's not the same thing entirely and that we have an different obligation with the public but I do worry about being held back from creating something great and innovative and possibly way outside of the box. The advantage of private schools is they have fewer stakeholders to convince and definitely can be more innovative if they choose. I still believe in public education but the idea of getting public approval for change is more than a little frustrating.
The reason private schools do so well is because they are a microcosm of the society that is easy to educate. And the reason you dont need stakeholders to get involved there is that microcosm trusts the system. Note that it is more or less the same conceptual system as in the public sector, with the exception of some funding and bureaucratic differences (things that cant explain the disparity in results). If people trusted the system and supported it to do what it is trying to do, I expect we'd see much better results, in spite of the fact that our society is crumbling around it.
What everyone seems to be screaming about right now is how quickly we are adopting innovations on a mass scale without appropriate "research." Personally, I believe the funding/adoption cycle in schools does need to move up in order to stay current with emerging technologies and cultural trends, at question is when and who gets to control those decisions. I think I'm going to invent a platform where the general public can vote on the things they want to see in education, and let the highest star ratings win! ;)