… the more it stays the same. I was talking to a colleague at school yesterday about our NPDL project, and some of the things we are working on. She shared with me video that Pearson Ed has put out called Rey’s Storey: School of Thought – A vision for the future of learning.
As I started watching it, I was struck a memory, so did a quick search and found the video by Apple called Knowledge Navigator, which was their vision of the future. But from 1987. Take a few minutes and watch them both.
So. What do you think? If Apple has the ‘vision of the future’ in 1987, and I don’t really see it as much different from Peason’s ‘vision of the future’ in 2014, what has changed? Have we made any progress toward this vision? I’ve been thinking a lot about barriers to progress in edu and wonder how to move ’em.
Hi Colin! I came across this today and loved it-what a blast from the past!! So much of what they predict has come to pass, and so yes, there are many similarities in terms of what the technology can do. I do see differences, though, and they are huge:
In the recent video, the technology is completely mobile and immersive. It follows the students everywhere physically and temporaly and is part of the environment. In the older one, it still lives in a device, on a desk. When he leaves the room, he leaves the technology and connections behind.
In the recent video, the technology fully belongs to the student, not the educator. The educator in the 1987 clip was using technology to create a lecture to be passively consumed by students. The teacher is still the person who holds, curates and packages the knowledge. There is a sense that there is a “right” answer and the teacher just needs to find the right expert to get that answer. In the new video, the student is the one who accesses the knowledge, including the work of other students. There is no single answer, there are many. The teachers’ role has changed to that of advisor, provocateur, coach.
In the old video, the task was about knowledge. It was about learning about the most up-to-date facts, but without any evident
purpose for the learning. In the new one it is about solving a problem and creating a solution that will actually work. The knowledge accessed was in the service of that task.
This is a great comparison! Really got me thinking-