Experience and Education Chapter 2

Here are my thoughts on chapter two of John Dewey's Experience and Education.

Chapter 2

The Need for a Theory of Experience

In our MCL circles we discuss creating the “ideal learning experience”.  The idea of the ideal learning experience is a reaction to our current learning environment that is dominated by “not so ideal learning experiences”.  We can list all of the learning experiences that are not ideal, but they can be summed up by the dominance of the “sage on the stage”.  Harkening back to chapter 1, we must also remember that we must not succumb to the “either-or” fallacy.  We must resist the urge to think that our job will be done in education if we create “experiences” that differ from the existing model of learning.  Dewey makes this point by saying that although “Each experience may be lively, vivid and ‘interesting’, and yet their disconnectedness may artificially generate dispersive, disintegrated, centrifugal habits” that will make education and experiences more disconnected from a student’s life.  Our challenge in the world of MCL is to NOT fall into the trap of thinking that creating any experience will automatically improve learning for students just because it is a different experience from what currently exists in our schools.

Dewey states that experiences are meaningful only when they are connected to a student’s future experience.  This is the reason that disconnected learning experiences (according to Dewey) harm the learning of students; they have no relevance to the experience (either in the present or the future) of students.  It seems to me that if we are going to have a significant impact on the arc of learning in our country, we must grapple with this idea of creating learning experiences that are relevant to the present and connected to future learning experiences of students.  We must be cognizant that a learning experience that is engaging and outside the common learning experience of today may not necessarily be any better than a traditional learning experience.  Let’s not kid ourselves to believe that just because we are creating something different, that we are creating something better.

So what is our philosophy of education?  I think it noteworthy that Dewey takes the time to say that our current system is probably philosophically agnostic and runs on the power of habits.  The habits of the system have largely gone unexamined and have morphed into a quasi philosophy.  I recently had a conversation with a well known educator who shows passion for helping kids.  As we discussed what the possibilities of education can be, he continually referred to practices that are backed by “science”.  In other words, educators need only refer to those strategies and programs that have run the gauntlet of peer reviewed “scientific” research.  There are many problems with the assumptions underlying this philosophy of scientific research, but for our discussion here, let’s concentrate on the idea that we must keep education, learning and schooling as simple as possible.  When my son was in first grade (and struggling with reading), I did not ask his teacher to mount a mini-dissertation defense to develop and justify her recommendation for helping him.  Rather, I simply asked her what she believes, in her professional experience, will help him become a better reader.  She developed a plan (that worked) based on what she knew to be right.  As we develop a philosophy of learning (and experience) let’s access the experiences and knowledge of the actual educators in the field and lets not complicate the issue by assuming educational habits are a philosophy and that “scientific” research holds the answer to creating learning experiences.

John Dewey's Experience and Education Chapter One

A good friend (and mentor) of mine, Duff Rearick, and I are reading Experience and Education by John Dewey and sharing our thoughts with each other.  We both read a chapter and then write our response to the chapter.  Our response centers on what Dewey has to say as it relates to Mass Customized Learning and creating a new learning ecosystem.  I share our writings on this blog.  Please feel free to join the conversation!

Tom's reaction to chapter One.

Chapter 1

Traditional versus Progressive Education

Recently I completed reading What Hath God Wrought: The transformation of America from 1815-1848 by Daniel Walker Howe.  I mention this because the author refers to this time in American History as a time of a “communication revolution”.  Whether it was people marveling at the (short) 78 days it took a ship to travel from China to New York or the mind blowing speed at which the telegraph allowed communication to occur, people marveled at the improvement of the speed of communication.  I mention this because I believe we have deluded ourselves in the 21^st century to think that we live in a “special” time in which technological change is happening at a pace never equaled before in the history of mankind.  That assumption is just not true. Each stage of history American history has undergone incredible changes that has significantly impacted our society.  In other words, change is a constant and people living through it always believe the change they are experiencing is the most significant ever.   However, nothing is static.

In chapter One of Experience and Education, Dewey criticizes the educational system because society views subject matter and instruction as a static entity which has no relevance to the lived experience of students.

“Moreover, that which is taught is thought of as essentially static.  It is taught as a finished product, with little regard to the ways in which it was originally built up or to the changes that will surely occur in the future.  It is to a large extent a cultural product of societies that assumed that the future would be much like the past, and yet it is used as educational food in a society where change is the rule and not the exception” [my italics] (p. 19).

Two interesting points.  First, in 1938 when Dewey was writing this book he recognized that societies are in a constant state of change and, two, educators must not be fooled into thinking knowledge is static.  If one believes that knowledge is static, then viewing the world through what Dewey calls an  “either-or” dichotomy will help you make sense of the past but inhibits you in making sense of the present and future.

I believe educators must embrace the grey area between the “either-or’s”.  Educational reformers (I like to call them deformers) have set the narrative of education to either-or.  If you do not agree with what they want to do to education, then you are against kids because what they want to do is all that will work.  This has resulted in an intensification of the education philosophy that Dewey was speaking against: teach the standards from an approved textbook and make a curriculum that is imposed from outside the education system.  My dream for true educational transformation (and I know Duff Rearick is rolling his eyes at my use of “transformation”) starts with educators (namely teachers) working in the area between the either-or’s.  This means, like Dewey mentions in chapter One, that we understand what works and does not work in our current system and create learning experiences for students that allows the subject matter to come alive in the context of our current society.

We must create an atmosphere in schools (or whatever iteration of schools the future holds) where teachers are not imposing subject matter onto the students.  Rather, the teacher will create experiences (working with the students) that will contextualize the learning the student is attempting to understand.  The act of creating experiences versus imposing “knowledge” increases the importance of teachers in the educational system.  They are not just portals in which established knowledge is passed through to students, they use their knowledge of the subject, the student, their community and society to craft learning experiences which are meaningful.  In effect, the act of creating experiences professionalizes teachers.

Mass Customized Learning: A Quick Definition and Guide

Appalachia Intermediate Unit 8, working in a partnership with The Pennsylvania Leadership Development Center, created the Pennsylvania Mass Customized Learning Consortium last year.  The consortium is open to all organizations involved in learning throughout Pennsylvania and surrounding states.  Membership consists of those education leaders who will work to transform learning in their organizations to assure students (learners) receive learning at their learning level every day.  The concept of “Mass Customized Learning” was made popular through the work of Chuck Schwahn and Bea McGarvey in their book Inevitible: Mass Customized Learning: Learning in the Age of Empowerment.  Nationally, there are schools all over the United States implementing ideas of customized learning into their system; most notably in Lindsay Unified School District in California.  As the Pennsylvania consortium grows from our current 24 learning organizations, there is usually one basic question that leaders have as they contemplate joining with the consortium. 

Question  #1: “We already personalize and differentiate our instruction so we are already “customizing” education in our schools so why should we join with the consortium?”

            Answer: Mass Customized Learning is much more than “personalization”, differentiation” or “performance based”.  MCL has two premises:

1.     Dislodge  the industrial age model of schooling. 

2.     Become radically learner centered.

Think about the examples of customization in our world today.  If you use Facebook, Twitter or Amazon your interactive experience is customized to your likes and dislikes.  In our area of Pennsylvania you can have your coffee and sandwich selections customized to your exact taste at a Sheetz.  Technology has progressed to the point where learning leaders can now leverage the technological tools to create a customized learning environment for our students (learners).   

Mass Customized Learning advocates do not believe that we can "tinker toward utopia" (to borrow Larry Cuban's term) anymore.  Rather, we must work to create a new learning ecosystem that goes beyond the current educational system and allows learners and their families to customize their learning experience. Creating a learning ecosystem without barriers of time, space or place is essential for our learners and our society. We now live in a time and place where we can create a learning experience for all of our children that is not time based.  By “time based” I mean that students move from one grade to the next and from one concept to the next often without regard to actual learning.  It seems obvious that we should not accept an educational system that “teaches” students in “batches” based on their date of birth.  Rather, let’s create a learning ecosystem that meets every student at their level (academic, learning, social, etc) every second of every day. This is what we discuss and implement as members of the Pennsylvania mass Customized Learning Consortium.  To get a better understanding of the industrial age model of schooling, please watch the video below.