TRANSFORMATION DIRECTIONS: A FORWARD LOOKK U R T B

. RI C

H T E R , E D . D.

E D U C A T I ON A L T

E C H N O L O G Y SP E C I A

L I ST

U N I VE R S I T

Y OF N

O R T H CA R O L I N

A CH A R L O T T E

Sorting vs. LearningTime-based Attainment-

basedGroup-based Person-basedTeacher-based Resource-based

Features for Education?

Key Markers of the Information Age

People learn at different rates…

Industrial Age Information Age

Bureaucratic organization Team organizationAutocratic leadership Shared leadershipCentralized control Autonomy, accountabilityAdversarial relationships Cooperative relationshipsMass production, etc. Customized production, etc.Compliance InitiativeConformity DiversityOne-way communications NetworkingCompartmentalization Holism (Division of Labor) (Integration of tasks)

Look at our Current ChangesKey Markerss of the Information Age

WHAT IS PARADIGM CHANGE…AND WHAT MIGHT THE NEW PARADIGM LOOK LIKE?

BOTTOM LINE: To move from sorting-focused system to a learning-focused system…

American Education MUST move from…

A Time Based Educational System

An Attainment Based Educational System

TRANSFORMATION DIRECTIONS: MSD DECATUR• Decatur is a township of Indianapolis, on SW side.• Schools: 1 high (9-12), 1 middle (7-8), 2 intermediate

(5-6), 4 elementary (K-4), and 1 early childhood.• Approximately 5,500 students and 350 full-time

teachers.• Initiated a district-wide systemic change project in

January 2001, using the GSTE.• Fall 2008: Redesign of Grade 5-6 Learning Academy• Spring 2009: Redesign moved to Enrollment

Management Design Effort• 2009-Present: Recovery and forward movement.

Efforts to engage in Standards based education include:

• Movement from K-4/Intermediate (5-6)/Junior HS (7-8)/HS (9-12)T0

K-6/Junior HS/HS

Coming soon: Non-graded promotion Small Schools integrating thematic education in multiple settings District Choice Teacher-groupings with shared principals Standards-based promotion (PIES)

TRANSFORMATION DIRECTIONS: MSD DECATUR

TRANSFORMATION DIRECTIONS: OTHERS

Henry L. Cottrell School169 Academy RoadMonmouth, Maine

Principal: Deborah Emery169 Academy RoadMonmouth, Maine

Adams County School District 50http://www.sbsadams50.org2401 West 80th Ave. Denver, CO 80221

Dr. Oliver GrenhamEmail: OGrenham@adams50.org

ReInventing Schools Corporation (RISC)

Standards-Based Education: Students advance only when (and as soon as) standards are met.

TRANSFORMATION DIRECTIONS: OTHERS

Standards-Based Education: Students advance only when (and as soon as) standards are met.

Sample School

Henry L. Cottrell School

(Maine) RISC

Downtown School (DMPS)

Adams 50 (CO) RISC

Chugach School District (AK) RISC

MN New Country Schools

(EdVisions)

Montessori System (200 in

U.S.)Attainment-based student progress   x X X X X X

Customized learning     X X X X XProject space and instructional space X X   x X X X

Criterion-referenced assessment   X X x X X X

Criterion-referenced student records   X X x X X X

New roles for teachers X X X x X X X

New roles for technology   X   x X X X

New roles for parents x X X x x * x

Multi-age grouping & multi-year mentoring   x X x X X X

Enjoyable learning X X X x X X XSkills for self-directed learning X X X x X X X

Collaborative learning X X X x   X x

Learning by teaching X X   x   X x

Well-rounded development   X X x X X X

Small learning communities   X X x X X X

Choice for students, parents, and teachers   x X x   X X

Family services   X   x      A learning cooperative   x   x   X  

WHY PIES?Paradigm change

Knowledge work rather than manual labor Learning-focused rather than sorting-focused (student

progress) Student assessment and Student records Student self-direction and motivation (relevant, authentic)

Need for technology to play different roles The need for seamless integration of all aspects of

student learning Student records, planning, instruction, assessment,

communications, etc. ILSs, CMSs, and LMSs do not provide necessary functionality

Grade books, teacher-centered, group-paced

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 9

PIES: MAJOR FUNCTIONS

Major Function

s

Record-Keeping Planning Instructi

onAssessm

ent

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 10

Dr. Kurt B. RichterUNC CharlotteE:

kurichte@indiana.edu

Dr. Charles M. Reigeluth

Indiana UniversityE:

reigelut@indiana.edu

PAUSE WHILE KURT TAKES A TIME LIMIT BREATH!

Materials link: http://kurtrichter.com/siia/

PIES: MAJOR FUNCTIONS: RECORD-KEEPING

Record-Keeping

Standards Inventory

Personal Attainments Inventory

Personal Characteristics Inventory

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 12

PIES MAJOR FUNCTIONS: PLANNING

Planning

Long-Term Goals

Current Options

Short-Term Goals

Projects Teams Roles Contr

acts

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 13

PIES MAJOR FUNCTIONS: INSTRUCTION

Instruction

Project Initiation

Instruction

Project Support

Instructional Developmen

t

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 14

PIES MAJOR FUNCTIONS: ASSESSMENT

Assessment

Presenting Authentic

Tasks

Evaluating Student

Performances

Providing Immediate Feedback

Certification of

Attainments

Developing Student

Assessments

Improving Instruction & Assessment

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 15

PIES: SECONDARY FUNCTIONS Communication

Communication via PIES Parents/teachers: to get access to students’ inventory of

attainments Two-way communication between parents and teachers Two-way communication between students and teachers Two-way communication among students Tools for communication

Web 2.0 technologies: Wikis/ Blogs/ Podcasts/ Video-sharing websites/…

Internet technologies: webpage creation, discussion boards, and whiteboards

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 16

PIES: SECONDARY FUNCTIONSGeneral Student Data Function A student’s name, address, birth date, parent information,

health information, attendance The student’s mentor & teachers, major life events, school or

learning community one belongs to, and community organizations one is involved with; physical location

School Personnel Information Function A teacher’s name and address Assigned students, certifications and awards received,

professional development plan and progress; physical locationPIES Administration Function Supporting administration of sensitive data Providing and restricting access to the data

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 17

PIES: FUTURE ACTIVITIES

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 18

The PIES APP:Open

Preferably open sourceOpen API’s (external developers may develop for platform, similar to Google, Facebook)

InteroperableFunctionality is not restricted to use in one application but can communicate with multiple platforms (GoogleMaps)

CustomizableUser can customize interface and even functionality with drag-and-drop ease (iGoogle)

ModularizedBuilt on a platform of function-focused apps, rather than a single, massive application (Web 2.0)

PIES: FUTURE ACTIVITIES

Phase 1: A funded project to develop and improve PIES

Rapid prototype for “proof of concept” with an existing open-source system (e.g., Moodle)

Formative evaluation with teachers in a new-paradigm school to identify R&D priorities

Spearheaded by Dabae Lee & Yeol Huh

Phase 2: A funded project to develop PIES 1.0 Address the R&D priorities found in Phase 1.

Phase 3: A funded project to formatively evaluate and improve PIES 1.0

Try out in several schools and revise.Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 19

Dr. Kurt B. RichterUNC CharlotteE:

kurichte@indiana.edu

Dr. Charles M. Reigeluth

Indiana UniversityE:

reigelut@indiana.edu

QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? LINKS?

Materials link: http://kurtrichter.com/siia/

SELECTED PUBLICATIONS

Reigeluth, C. M., Watson, S. L., Watson, W. R., Dutta, P., Chen, Z., & Powell, N. (2008). Roles for technology in the information-age paradigm of education: Learning management systems. Educational Technology, 48(6), 32-39.

Watson, W. R., Lee, S., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2007). Learning Management Systems: An overview and roadmap of the systemic application of computers to education. In F. M. M. Neto & F. V. Brasileiro (Eds.), Advances in computer-supported learning (pp. 66-96). London: Information Science Publishing.

Watson, W. R., & Watson, S. L. (2007). An argument for clarity: What are Learning Management Systems, what are they not, and what should they become? TechTrends, 51(2), 28-34.

Watson, S. L., & Reigeluth, C. M. (2008, Sept.–Oct.). The learner-centered paradigm of education. Educational Technology, 48(5), 39–48.

Oct 28, 2010 AECT ANAHE IM 2010 21