Interestingly, they seem to conclude that it ain’t gonna happen in any widespread way in current schools. They note that successful schools with new approaches tend to be charter schools, schools that started from the beginning with a focus (high tech school in Philly), public charter schools or magnet schools. The rest seem hopelessly locked into the old model.

They also observed that if leaders (boards, superintendents, principals, teacher leaders) don’t get it, it ain’t gonna happen. Additionally, teachers obviously have a choice to get on board or not, complicating and compromising rapid movement. If they choose not to, then principals have the task of getting them out of the way by helping them find different assignments—not an easy task. There are, after all, parents, teachers, and students that want worksheet schools and they should have them—just as we who want something more technological, problem-based, or project-based should have the freedom and encouragement to organize around what we see as important.

Their thinking has helped me conclude a little more firmly that change—necessary, quick, and fundamental—is not possible with current thinking. Many good and decent people have been at it a long time. Yet schools haven’t changed much. It looks easier to destroy the system and rebuild another more organic, loosely coupled, system of learning environments (formerly known as schools). And I’m increasingly ok with it, given the destruction to the human spirit that the current system causes.

You may want to check out the podcasts. The question upfront helps you decide if the broad cast is worthwhile, so it doesn’t have to be a time waster.

Tom Friedman’s May 21st opinion piece in the New York Times really roughed me up as well. Let me explain. Scott McLeod also posted a very interesting question that day: So what if schools don’t prepare kids for the 21st century? The discussion that followed was rich and insightful. I’ve been chewing on both pieces for over a week now. Friedman writes about the huge transfer of wealth underway to the “petro-authoritarian states”. The implications are chilling. He ends with a quote from David Rothkopf, author of Superclass: ”“Call it the triple deficit. A fiscal deficit that will soon have us choosing between rationed health care, sufficient education, adequate infrastructure and traditional levels of defense spending, a trade deficit that has us borrowing from our rivals to the point of real vulnerability, and a geopolitical deficit that is a legacy of Iraq, which may result in hesitancy to take strong stands where we must.”

I think these two posts are inextricably intertwined. Learning in this society needs to be first class for ALL students. There needs to be many kinds of “schools”—not the one model we have now. It’s all hands on deck—we need all the talent and creativity we can find to face the reality of the swiftly and fundamentally changing world. But it is way easier to drift along thinking we’re the best, the strongest, the richest and that’s the way it’s intended to be. Wake up and don’t go back to sleep!

The breeze at dawn has secrets to tell you. 

                                                                                    Don’t go back to sleep. 

You must ask for what you really want. 

                                                                                    Don’t go back to sleep. 

People are going back and forth across the doorsill 

                                                                                    where the two worlds touch. 

The door is round and open. 

                                                   Don’t go back to sleep

  — Jelaluddin Rumi