Skills for the 21st Century

Cognitive and Literacy Skills for Success in a Fast-Paced Technological Age

Archive for the ‘Meta-Skills’ Category

LAPCAE Materials

Posted by wrmcnutt on June 5, 2012

I’d like to thank everyone who came to my session, Emerging Technologies in the Adult Education Classroom. You were a fun group to talk to and I hope that everyone got something to take away from the session.  As promised, I’ve linked my slide set and handout below.  While you’re here, I hope you’ll take the time to look around and some of the articles we’ve shared in the past.  If you have any questions about the topic, or anything about technology in education, really, feel free to ask.  If we don’t know the answer, we probably should, so we’ll find out for you.

Posted in Changing the AE field, Job Skills, Meta-Skills, Pace of Change, Technology In the Classroom, Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Again – Increased Access Does NOT Equal Increased Skills

Posted by durencls on June 25, 2010

Back from vacation and catching up on e-mails, tweets, and blog posts – Whew! This Web 2.0 stuff is tiring!  🙂

From my backlog of e-mail, here is more evidence that simply increasing access to equipment/software/internet does not necessarily lead to an increase in necessary technology skills (or even thinking skills).

Children With Home Computers Likely to Have Lower Test Scores, Study Finds

ScienceDaily (June 19, 2010) — Around the country and throughout the world, politicians and education activists have sought to eliminate the “digital divide” by guaranteeing universal access to home computers, and in some cases to high-speed Internet service.

However, according to a new study by scholars at Duke University’s Sanford School of Public Policy, these efforts would actually widen the achievement gap in math and reading scores. Students in grades five through eight, particularly those from disadvantaged families, tend to post lower scores once these technologies arrive in their home.

Vigdor and Ladd concluded that home computers are put to more productive use in households where parental monitoring is more effective. In disadvantaged households, parents are less likely to monitor children’s computer use and guide children in using computers for educational purposes. [emphasis added]

I found this highly intriguing, but knowing that articles don’t always tell the whole or unbiased picture, I found and skimmed the original report:

Scaling the Digital Divide: Home Computer Technology and Student Achievement by Charles T. Clotfelter, Helen F. Ladd and Jacob L. Vigdor, Duke University, July 29, 2008. 

Here we find that the researchers had access to administrative data for ALL NC 5th-8th grade students from 2000-2005 – over 500,000 student surveys/observations per year – WOW! This allowed both cross-student and within-student analysis over a three year period.  The authors specifically note that the period studied is BEFORE the Facebook/Twitter phenomenon, but during a period of significant growth in computer and internet access. Within this document we find these statements [emphasis added]:

  • Relative to students with no computer at home, those who use a home computer for schoolwork once or twice per month score between 4 and 5 percent of a standard deviation higher on both reading and math tests.
  • Students who own a computer but never use it for schoolwork [regardless of ov erall computer usage pattern] have math test scores nearly indistinguishable from those without a home computer.
  • Students reporting almost daily use of their home computer for schoolwork score significantly worse than students with no computer at home.
  • transitioning from no home computer access to any of these use categories [rarely, monthly, weekly or daily use] is associated with a statistically significant decline in both reading and math test scores.
  • students who transition from having no home computer to having one and using it for schoolwork almost every day post relative test score declines on the order of 4% of a standard deviation in both reading and math. …the most plausible explanation is that students who transition into the highest computer use category are using their computers for much more than just schoolwork, and these non-productive uses are actually crowding out productive study time.
  • Results for both reading and math indicate that the negative effect of computer ownership on both math and reading holds fairly steady over the first three years.

The researchers conclude:

Our preferred specifications indicate that 5th through 8th grade students [from 2000-2005] generally perform best on math and reading tests when they do not have access to a computer at home. Conditional on owning a computer, the “optimal” rate of use is infrequent, twice a month or less. For the average student, introducing home internet service does not produce additional benefits. For school administrators interested in maximizing achievement test scores, or reducing racial and socioeconomic disparities in test scores, all evidence suggests that a program of broadening home computer access would be counterproductive[emphasis added]

So – programs to simply ADD hardware, software, and internet access to homes (or schools) are likely to have a NEGATIVE effect on traditional academic performance, unless partnered with efforts to ensure productive use of those tools as relates to those academic areas.  Just putting them AT a computer does not mean they will learn more. They still need those crucial Thinking Skills in order to use the computer for learning effectively. According to this study, this means not ONLY training teachers in effective uses of computers in the classroom, but ALSO training parents on productive uses of computers IN THE HOME.

Hmmmm… so what does this mean for children with parents who have low-literacy skills?  While the researchers did not focus their analysis on this factor, it was included in the research data they presented. Examining the tables and graphs presented we find that:

  • Parents with less than a HS diploma were FAR less likely to HAVE a computer in their homes (or internet access) during this time period – 60% had computers as compared to 85% on average and as much as 90% overall by 2005.
  • Of homes with a computer where parents had less than a HS diploma, student computer usage rates of ‘never’ or ‘rarely’ were 8% higher than homes where parents had at least a HS diploma or associate’s degree.
  • The decline in math and reading scores associated with the introduction of a computer into the home were highest for homes where parents had less than a high school degree – higher by far than declines noted for race or economic factors (free lunch participation).

In fact, the researchers do make the following statements about parent influence on computer usage:

The evidence is consistent with the view that internet service, and technology more broadly, is put to more productive use in households with more effective parental monitoring of child behavior. Survey behavior indicates that students very commonly use the internet, and computers more generally, both to work on school-related projects and for personal entertainment. In households with insufficient [parental] monitoring, unproductive uses may not only crowd out productive computer time, but may also crowd out offline studying.

Disadvantaged students may also receive less instruction in how to use a computer, either because their schools have poorer resources, because their parents have less technical expertise, or because their parents are simply less available.   [emphasis added]

 So low-literate parents seem to need skills in effective and productive use of computers for learning in order to isupport and increase their child’s performance in traditional academic areas. Which means that they TOO need those critical ‘meta-skills’ we’ve been touting on this blog! [I love it when empirical research backs up our theories/arguments! ]

In the conclusion of their paper, researchers Vigdor and Ladd do acknowledge that additional computer access/training may have other, more positive purposes/value:

Of course, administrators may have other goals aside from improving math and reading test scores. Computer literate students may enjoy improved job opportunities later in life, or may be poised to take better advantage of online resources once their internal mechanisms for behavioral regulation have fully developed. Evaluations of the Texas Technology Immersion Project have shown improvements in student proficiency with technology and student discipline (Shapley et al., 2007). It is not clear, however, whether computer literacy actually leads to better employment outcomes (Krueger, 1993; DiNardo and Pischke 1997), ** and also not clear whether access to home computers in the early secondary school years is critical to later computer literacy.

Not really a rousing endorsement, huh?  Essentially, the researchers are clearly biased against education systems spending money on “increasing computer access in the home” and feel those funds could be better spent elsewhere.  I’d point out, however, that just dumping hardware/internet in the home, without comprehensive training and support to parents (including basic literacy training) was, like so many “access” efforts, likely doomed to fail from the start.

I do find, however, that this paper adds to the research showing the importance of parental literacy skills in K-12 student performance and success.  Teach the parent, reach the child!

**OK, I find this statement laughable – especially since they are citing research that is OVER 10 years old at the time their paper was published.

Posted in Job Skills, Meta-Skills, Teaching Tech Skills, Technology In the Classroom | 1 Comment »

New Common Core Standards – Where’s the Tech?

Posted by durencls on June 4, 2010

On June 2nd, 2010, the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices (NGA Center) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) released  the Common Core State Standards  for grades K-12.

Developed in collaboration with a variety of stakeholders including content experts, states, teachers, school administrators and parents… [we think that the] standards establish clear and consistent goals for learning that will prepare America’s children for success in college and work. ” [Read press release]

Many in the K-12 field and the field of Adult Literacy Education have been closely following the development of the Common Core Standards (see our 4/21/2010 post). It is expected that these standards will have a dramatic effect on WHAT is taught, WHEN, and HOW in all education fields. Upon (an admittedly quick) review of these standards, I noted these things overall:

  • The English Language Arts and Mathematics Standards documents have signficantly different formats/approaches (clearly written by different folks). Thus how these two documents address technology skills is very differently.
  • The Language Arts document is organized around a set of “College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards” in 4 areas: Reading – literature, informational text and foundation skills, Writing, Speaking & Listening, and Language) – skills they feel students should have upon exiting K-12 education. They also provide a ‘vision’ of students who are “College and Career Ready in English Language Skills.”   
  • The Math document contains a general list of “Standards for mathematical Practice” – processes and proficiencies important to all mathematical processes (technology is only mentioned in one place here in the entire document). The remainder of the document focuses on grade-specific “Standards for Mathematical Content” listing the procedures and understandings students should have at that level. They note however, that order may vary and hope that implementation of the standard may “…allow research on learning progressions to inform and improve the design of standards...”
  • The Language Arts document includes skills as applied in Social Studies and Science, and strongly emphasize the integrated nature of language skills with all other disciplines. The Mathematics Standards do not seem to do so.
  • Overall the Language Arts document seems richer and more well developed.  There is much more mention of technology integrated throughout. [But, then, it was written by *writers* not mathematicians, who tend to think about writing in a different way 🙂 ]
  • Technology: While I have not yet had the chance to read every paragraph under every grade level, I believe the writers of both documents have approached technology as a tool, not a set of skills in itself, and mention of technology is found mostly in the more “overarching” sections of the documents.
  • Lastly, it feels (to me) like there is something of a bias in these standards towards skills needed for success in higher education settings, although Career Readiness is mentioned throughout, there seems (to me) an emphasis of prepration for more academic environments.

So – what do these standards say about Technology skills for success?

The Mathematics Standards document says simply this, under Standards for Mathematical Practice:

5. Use appropriate tools strategically.
Mathematically proficient students consider the available tools when solving a mathematical problem. These tools might include pencil and paper, concrete models, a ruler, a protractor, a calculator, a spreadsheet, a computer algebra system, a statistical package, or dynamic geometry software. When making mathematical models, they know that technology can enable them to visualize the results of varying assumptions, explore consequences, and compare predictions with data. Mathematically proficient students at various grade levels are able to identify relevant external mathematical resources, such as digital content located on a website, and use them to pose or solve problems. They are able to use technological tools to explore and deepen their understanding of concepts.

The English Language Arts Standards document has more to say in several different sections:

Key Design Considerations:  Research and media skills blended into the Standards as a whole
To be ready for college, workforce training, and life in a technological society, students need the ability to gather, comprehend, evaluate, synthesize, and report on information and ideas, to conduct original research in order to answer questions or solve problems, and to analyze and create a high volume and extensive range of print and nonprint texts in media forms old and new. The need to conduct research and to produce and consume media is embedded into every aspect of today’s curriculum. In like fashion, research and media skills and understandings are embedded throughout the Standards rather than treated in a separate section.
(emphasis added)

In the Language Arts ‘vision’ statement – “Students Who are College and Career Ready in Reading, Writing, Speaking, Listening, & Language”:

They use technology and digital media strategically and capably.
Students employ technology thoughtfully to enhance their reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language use. They tailor their searches online to acquire useful information efficiently, and they integrate what they learn using technology with what they learn offline. They are familiar with the strengths and limitations of various technological tools and mediums and can select and use those best suited to their communication goals.

In three of the four College and Career Readiness (CCR) anchor standards:

Reading:
7. Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.

Writing:
6. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing and to interact and collaborate with others.
8. Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism.

Speaking & Listening:
2. Integrate and evaluate information presented in diverse media and formats, including visually, quantitatively, and orally.
5. Make strategic use of digital media and visual displays of data to express information and enhance understanding of presentations.
And also – New technologies have broadened and expanded the role that speaking and listening play in acquiring and sharing knowledge and have tightened their link to other forms of communication. Digital texts confront students with the potential for continually updated content and dynamically changing combinations of words, graphics, images, hyperlinks, and embedded video and audio.

WOW, that’s a lot to think over!  And you may have other things you want to investigate in this new document as well.  So Bill & I are going to give ourselves a chance to ruminate, and compare this standards document to both our list of meta-skills and the overall philosophy behind this blog and get back to you on this later.  (We’re going out of town soon and need to go do other stuff!)

In the meantime, you think on it too – and PLEASE feel free to make comments!

Posted in Changing the AE field, Job Skills, Meta-Skills, Teaching Tech Skills | 6 Comments »

Re-Making Humanity

Posted by durencls on June 2, 2010

In 1997, I was intrigued by the ideas presented in the film Gattaca.*   Set in a non-specific future earth, where genetic enhancement is the norm, the film tries to answer the question – is genetics everything? In this vision of the future, good, responsible parents consult with a geneticist before conception and work to give their child every genetic advantage possible.  Even simple dating decisions are made based on DNA comparisons – readily available from streetside kiosks.  In this future world, if you are not genetically perfect, it is assumed you cannot compete with those who are, and you are automatically relegated to lesser, more menial jobs. This science fiction idea could have significant implications for education – how do you teach in a genetically modified world?  Are those without genetic enhancement excluded from some educational opportunities?  What is fair?

Well, that future vision is now one step closer to reality:

ROCKVILLE, MD and San Diego, CA (May 20, 2010)— Researchers at the J. Craig Venter Institute (JCVI), a not-for-profit genomic research organization, published results today describing the successful construction of the first self-replicating, synthetic bacterial cell. [Read the entire Press Release]

Yes, there you have it, we can now manipulate genetic code to create artifical life. How soon until we are trying to teach genetically engineered children?

While our ability to manipulate genetic code is growing by leaps and bounds, neuroscience is experimenting with cognitive enhancement through chemical enhancement and neural feedback devices.  Off-label use of Adderall and other chemical neuroenhancers used to ‘strengthen’ ordinary cognition is already having an effect on how students ‘gain an edge’ at higher institutions.  Research and marketing companies are leaping to join the emerging  “Brain fitness” market.

At the same time, research is progressing on technological enhancements to human functioning – with implications not only for education, but also bio-mechanical engineering.  In one experiment by the School of Systems Engineering, University of Reading, Dr. Mark Gasson has had a high-end Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) chip was implanted in his left hand for over a year for the purpose of experimentation. This chip allowed him secure access to his University building and his mobile phone, as well as tracking his movements.  When he allowed his chip to be infected with a computer virus last month, he says that he, “…found it a surprisingly violating experience because the implant is so intimately connected to me but the situation is potentially out of my control.”  Further, Dr Gasson states:

“I believe it is necessary to acknowledge that our next evolutionary step may well mean that we all become part machine as we look to enhance ourselves. Indeed we may find that there are significant social pressures to have implantable technologies, either because it becomes as much of a social norm as say mobile phones, or because we’ll be disadvantaged if we do not.” 

If genetic engineering, neurological enhancement, and/or technological improvements to our cognitive abilities are clearly a furture trend, what are the implications for finding success in the 21st Century Workplace?  What skills and/or training will be needed by enhanced individuals for success?  And what of the likely “enhancement gap”?  What kinds of supports or preparation will this ‘disadvantaged’ group need to find success? To compete in this not-to-distant future?

This is an example of how the technologies themselves may affect not only how we educate, but also who and why.  And as teachers – will we ourselves have to be enhanced in order to serve an enhanced population or to qualify for our jobs?  [Oooo, creepy!]

Let us know what you think!  First person to comment on this post wins a free cognitive enhancement of their choice – performed in a hidden laboratory, during a thunderstorn, by your hosts! BwAH, ha, ha!**   

*The field of futurism is, of course, rife with references to science fiction films and writings, and as blog hosts we are certainly not immune.

**Just kidding! But Bill was sure ‘bwAH, ha, ha’ had to go in this post SOMEwhere!

Posted in Futurism, Meta-Skills, Pace of Change | Leave a Comment »

Project: Tech Skills Needed for Child Care Career Path

Posted by durencls on May 27, 2010

OK, so, following up on our project idea – What Tech Skills ARE Needed for Low Skill Jobs? , here is what I’ve found out about the Child Care career path so far.  Bear in mind that this is *informal* research, based solely on information I obtained from Tennessee sources.  I’d LOVE to hear how this compares to other states’ perspectives.

Now, child care is only ranked 29th in the 30 fastest growing jobs 2008-2018 (see the chart), with 142,000 jobs expected to be created (that’s only 1,420 jobs/yr nationwide, or an avg of roughly 28 new jobs per state/yr ). But it is one that appears inviting to many women with low skills (even those without a HS diploma/GED). It is especially appealing to those with young children as most child care facilities provide reduced fees to employees.

 As stated in the project, we’ll compare the federal information with reality (in TN), discuss what tech skills are needed for Child Care Workers, and then we’ll look at the training and tech skills needed to progress along that ‘career path’  in TN. But first, a bit about what “child care” means in TN.

In TN, most child care facilites are licensed, evaluated and overseen by the Dept of Human Services. Exceptions include child care for less than 5 children, less than 3 days a week, or less than three hours a day (this is important later*). Licensed Child Care (for both pre and in-school children) includes both ‘home’ (5-13 children) and ‘center‘ based (13 or more children). Licensing and evaluation criteria differ between these two types. TN also has two types of evaluation – a ‘report card’ required for licensing, and a voluntary ‘Star report’ that measures program quality. (Three stars is the highest rating, and concerned parents look for more stars.) This is all important as it directly relates to training and tech skills required for employees.

So – let’s check on our basic assuptions: The BLS reports that Child Care workers (in general) require only short-term on-the-job training to start, and earn, on average, $10.90/hr.  Is this true in TN? YES

  • For a Center-based facility: there is NO minimum education requirement to start, but you must complete 18 hours of inservice training in the 1st year and 12 hours thereafter. Minimum wage to start is typical for those with NO experience or training. To attain 3 stars, however, the facility requires employees to have a HS diploma/GED, and prefers them to have some experience or training.
  • For a ‘Home’ based child care: there is NO minimum education requirement to start, but you must complete 4 hours of inservice training in the 1st year and 2 hours thereafter. You must also be able to obtain and fill all appropriate paperwork with the state for licensure. You will make whatever your center nets after expenses and taxes – likely in the $10-12/hr range. Employees of this type of center (if any) are typically part time, minimum wage with no training requirements to start.
  • If you want to provide child care in your home that does not require licensing,* there is also no minimum education to start, and you require NO training. To compete with licensed (and ‘Star’-ed) facilities, you’ll need to charge lower than the average rate for care – which is around $100-125/week per child. So at a max of $95 for each of 4 kids, that would be $350/wk gross or $9.50/hr maximum (minus expenses and likely under the table/unreported). If one or more of those children is your own, then you’re going to be earning less than minimum wage.

Ok then, what technology do starting child care workers need to be familar or skilled with now?

For center-based or home-based care: NONE.

No kidding. TN DHS actually *downgrades* early child care centers in the star program evaluation process if there are computers or televisions, etc. in the classrooms. From the Star evaluation document for early childhood: “TV/video viewing and computer use tend to be passive in comparison to active involvement with materials and people. The use of each should be confined to subject material that is age-appropriate and mentally stimulating. Time limits encourage more active learning. Participation should not be required.” (No mention of computers/television etc. is made for school-age child care.)

In addition, most in-home and smaller child care centers can manage all their business records on paper/ledgers. So other than routine use of basic plumbing and kitchen facilities, right now most child care workers, to start, do not need/have to interact with anything more complicated than a microwave, battery-powered toy, or a cordless phone. (Now ‘lesser’ child care centers may use televisions/DVD players, but few will invest in a computer to “occupy” kids if it will detract from their overall evaluation.)

How might this change in 10 years? At the very least, as business practices move more and more to digital format, those running home-based child care may have to have the ability to locate, download, and complete state forms via the web – on a desktop or hand-held computer.  While starting employees at center-based care centers may need to apply online, or complete employment tasks online, they need no actual tech skills beyond those for everyday living. As current child development research frowns on technology as too passive for use in early childcare, a change in this pedagogy would have to occur to change this requirement.

*Addendum 5/28/10 SusanWB points out that currently, the internet is a great resource for instructional ideas and materials, and those making use of that resource will likely get ahead faster in this career path (and likely HAVE to have this skill to get their Associates degree).  In the next 10 years, it is highly likely that Child Care workers will have to have the skills to access and use online resources for instruction – if not at start, then to move up at all on this career path.

Ok, so now let’s look at the Caereer Path/future for a starting Child Care worker. To get ahead in this field, work for higher quality care centers, or be able to set higher fees, you need at least a High School Diploma/GED, and to participate in more than the required amount of training per year.  Below lists a path you might take in this career (note that, overall, this is not a lucrative field of work – top end is going to be in the $50-60,000/yr range.)

  • Lead teacher – requires a 30 hour certification or degree in any topic (Associates or higher). No additional tech skills currently required.
  • Center Director – Either a) same as lead teacher PLUS 7 years experience, or b) Associates degree +4 yrs, or c) Bachelors degree +2 yrs. Computer use for business-related applications & communication recommended, but not currently required. Likely to be required in near future.
  • Owner/Multi-center Director – Same as Center Director only further experience, possibly additional business management training. Computer use for business-related applications & communication strongly recommended, and likely to be required in near future.
  • Regional or State level Child Care Evaluator/Consultant– Bachelor’s degree in Child Development plus experience. Computer use for communication and professional development tasks currently required. (Moving on from here to further state level administrative/management positions, or research in Child development, etc.).

Alternatively – if you were in a home-based care situtation, your career path would likely be either to join a center as a lead teacher, start a center, or move directly to director of a center as you cannot care for more than 13 children in your own home – thus capping possible profits.

Note that most TN DHS  training is currently all face to face, but that is likely to change, requiring online study skills/internet use for all employees – as all licensed care facility employees must have SOME professional development every year. In fact, given the child care issues many in this career might have, online/distance training could be a real boon.

So, in summary, for Child Care Workers:

  • NO High School Degree/GED or technology skills currently required to start (although slightly higher starting salaries/better working conditions/future possibilities if you possess these).
  • Pay at or around minimum wage to start.
  • Additional training required to move along the career path – certificate (common for most long-term employees), Associate’s Degree for management jobs, and Bachelor’s to reach comon top end of field.
  • Additional technology skills expected for all workers in the near future (online training tasks), and currently necessary to move into management/administration.

Resources consulted in this process:

Posted in Job Skills, Meta-Skills, Projects, Skills 4 Low Skill Jobs?, Technology in the Workplace | 2 Comments »

Measuring iCritical Thinking Skills

Posted by durencls on May 18, 2010

Today,  almost like we’d planned it, Twitter brought us this article announcing a new assessment tool from Certiport and Educational Testing Service (ETS) for measuring students’  ” …ability to think critically within technology-enabled academic and workplace environments.”

New test measures students’ digital literacy (from eSchoolNews)

Exactly what I just asked about in our most recent post!  So – never trusting a secondary source, I went to Certiport’s web site and read over their marketing materials on this new iCritical Thinking exam. They say:

  • This certification measures the ability to navigate, critically evaluate, and communicate digital information to solve problems on the job in real-life scenarios. 
  • the exam is suitable for students from high school (grades 10 – 12) through college, as well as for working adults.
  •  The iCritical Thinking certification exam is aligned with the nationally recognized ICT literacy standards and is endorsed by the Global Digital Literacy Council (GDLC). 
  • Other stuff: The exam takes about an hour, is written at about the 10th grade reading level, and can be used as a stand alone exam, or used as a capstone to other Certiport exams (of course).

Also interesting was this list of “tasks”/activities their material says is covered by the exam: 

  • Understand and articulate the scope of an information problem in order to facilitate the electronic search for information. [define the problem]
  • Collect and/or retrieve information in digital environments. Information sources might include web pages,databases, etc. [research and prioritize]
  • Judge whether digital information satisfies an information problem by determining authority, bias, timeliness, relevance, and other aspects of materials.
    [evaluate and analyze]
  • Organize digital information to help you or others find it later.
  • Interpret and represent information, using digital tools to synthesize,summarize, compare, and contrast information from multiple sources. [visual literacy, analyze, integrate]
  • Adapt, apply, design or construct information in digital environments. [create, innovate, wing it]
  • Disseminate information tailored to a particular audience in an effective digital format. [communicate effectively]
  • Asks students to integrate these technologies into the above tasks: E-mail, Instant Messaging, Bulletin Board Postings, Internet Browsing, Search Engines, Data Searches, File Management, Word Processing, Spreadsheets, Presentations, & Graphics.

So, OK, on the one hand I’m all excited – I want to SEE it – review it (and maybe even take it!). Does it really do all it says? If so – well, that would be a pretty good start at measuring 21st century skills! 

On the other hand, I am skeptical – you have to be a fluent 10th grade level reader to take the test (about GED pass level) – so not so useful for our lower level adult literacy students attempting to get a job. Its also through Certiport, so its likely expensive. And it is brand new without a whole lot of user feedback.

Anyone out there tried it yet? Have anything to share?

Thanks to Debra Hargrove  for the link!  You can follow her on Twitter or see her work at  Florida TechNet.

Posted in Assessment, Changing the AE field, Job Skills, Meta-Skills | 2 Comments »

College Not Necessary for Success in 21st Century?

Posted by durencls on May 17, 2010


So, interesting/controversial article from the New York Times today(Thanks Margy!)

Plan B: Skip College 

Quotes from the article that caught my eye :

  • Perhaps no more than half of those who began a four-year bachelor’s degree program in the fall of 2006 will get that degree within six years, according to the latest projections from the Department of Education. For college students who ranked among the bottom quarter of their high school classes, the numbers are even more stark: 80 percent will probably never get a bachelor’s degree or even a two-year associate’s degree. That can be a lot of tuition to pay, without a degree to show for it.
  •  

  • College degrees are simply not necessary for many jobs. Of the 30 jobs projected to grow at the fastest rate over the next decade in the United States, only seven* typically require a bachelor’s degree, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. [* or higher, and note that most of these 30 are in the lowest paying categories, like retail and food service – http://www.bls.gov/news.release/ecopro.t06.htm ]
  •  

  • “It is true that we need more nanosurgeons than we did 10 to 15 years ago, but the numbers are still relatively small compared to the numbers of nurses’ aides we’re going to need. We will need hundreds of thousands of them over the next decade.”  Professor Vedder, founder of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a research nonprofit in Washington. (And much of their training, he added, might be feasible outside the college setting.) [note that of the jobs listed in the second bullet above, TWELVE require only “short-term on-the-job training”]
  •  

  • Leading economists are cited as suggesting that the US should, “…steer some students toward intensive, short-term vocational and career training, through expanded high school programs and corporate apprenticeships.” 
  •  

  •  In one 2008 survey of more than 2,000 businesses in Washington State, employers said entry-level workers appeared to be most deficient in being able to “solve problems and make decisions,” “resolve conflict and negotiate,” “cooperate with others” and “listen actively.” [Sound familiar?]
  •  

The article does go on to present the related issues of lowering expectations, discrimination, etc. implied in directing some away from four (or even 2) year colleges.

BUT, if employers are failing students for lacking the basics of how to behave and communicate in the office – critical skills for ANY task – much less a technological task, then these issues NEED to be addressed by Adult Literacy programs and embedded in that curriculum.

I may have missed it – can anyone tell me where, in this recent federal push for “career readiness,” do we find funding and support for vocational training? Apprenticeships? Internships? Short-term certificate programs? Intense on-the-job training?

Our current academic systems – Adult Literacy Education included, are measured for accountability by participant/student performance on academic-type standardized assessments.  These are not designed to measure skills like “solve problems and make decisions” “resolve conflict and negotiate,” “cooperate with others” and “listen actively.” Are these tools, then an effective measure of how well folks are being prepared for the workforce?

What can the field of adult literacy (or even K-12 education) do to balance the call for more and more students to enter 2 and 4 year colleges?  How can we BEST counsel and support students for “beyond the GED?”

Posted in Changing the AE field, Futurism, Job Skills, Meta-Skills | Leave a Comment »

Teens and Cell Phones – Implications for the Future

Posted by durencls on May 6, 2010

So in surfing last night, I stumbled across a posting I initially thought was redundant – “yeah, yeah, yeah, teens and cell phones, I know all this.”  The more I looked at it, and thought about it, however, the more implications and connections it had for the future and education.  

From Flowtown‘s marketing blog: “How Are Teens Using Their Cell Phones?  (based on Pew Research)

As we’ve said before, futurism – predicting the future – is hard, and many have really failed at it.  But as educators’ mission is to prepare students for the future, we need to at least try to align our instruction with what we think are the most reasonable future predictions.  Once source for these predictions is “generational research/theory” – particularly the study of the behaviors and affinities of younger, “up and coming” members of society – teenagers and young adults (MillenialsGeneration Z, etc.).

So what predictions can we glean from this one graphic developed from marketing research?

  • Cell phones – mobile, wireless communication is now the norm, and this trend will continue.  Although only 37% of teens’ phones have internet access, most futurists predict wireless mobile computing will become much more ubiquitous. M-learning is a current educational hot topic.
  • Texting (which is a form of writing – honest), is preferred over auditory use of cell phones by teens. This trend is being seen more and more in all age groups. Short quick written updates – instant messaging, tweets, status updates, texts, etc. are becoming a tool for building community, marketing, finding information, etc.
    • Reading implication: the ability to successfully navigate this flood of “short hand notes”  will become critical. Skimming and scanning text and visuals, as well as fast-paced decision-making and prioritization skills (what is worth my time?) will be skills needed for success. [Hmmm, note to self, explore this more in a later post…]
    • Writing implication: the ability to communicate clearly in an ultra-concise format that grabs readers’ attention will be a critical skill.
  • Increased use of visuals to process an ever growing pile of information. This blog regularly posts such “infographics,” and in fact, this type of visual representation of data is becoming more and more popular. Continuing the trend we see in USA today, people want to be able to view statistics and info “at a glance.”  Also note that, after texting, the vast majority of teens use cell phones for taking and sharing pictures. The ability to process information presented visually – pictures, graphs, video is and will be key to success in the workplace.
  • The need for skepticism – This visual is, remember, a marketing tool, created from marketing research, likely to further a particular agenda.  All representations of data contain bias, and some can even be deliberately misleading (or even incorrect) in what they imply or show.  To be successful in a more fast-paced, information heavy, visual world, people will the skills to critically evaluate what they see, hear, and read for validity, bias, and intent. They need to know not just HOW to read a graph, but how the data connects to it, ways it can be visually manipulated, etc. They need to be critical consumers of visually presented data.

Wow.  All that in a graphic that most folks will look at for less than 2 minutes (if even that).

Posted in 21st Century Communication, Futurism, Meta-Skills | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Seeing Patterns – A Medieval Tech Support Example

Posted by durencls on April 27, 2010

OK, this video has been around a while,* but we really like it. Medieval Tech Support demonstrates, for us, several common cognitive skills needed to deal with changing technologies. 

Do your students “generalize”?  Are they good at seeing patterns and using those patterns to solve similar problems?  Are they solid logical thinkers? Or are they like Ansgar here?

As we may have noted before, the inspiration for this blog came from many many technological support experiences  with folks similar to Ansgar.  We kept (and keep) seeing the same folks make the same mistakes over and over again in dealing with different technological experiences. We also see the same kinds of mistakes come up again and again across different ages and types of users having widely varying educational and training backgrounds. 

So then Bill and I got some Tech folks together and asked,  “What SKILLS do our problem users seem to be lacking when it comes to dealing with technology?”  The draft 21st Century skills list was the result. [Thanks to everyone who has so far given us feedback!]

As we talked with other Tech folks, one thing we came up with again and again was the concept of “generalization” – the ability to transfer knowledge from one venue or situation to another.  Ansgar here, cannot generalize the issue of “it opens from only one side”  from the larger tome to the smaller “manual.”  He also cannot generalize from what he knows –  if you roll up a scroll, the text is not lost – to this new format – if you turn a page, the text is not lost.

We also regularly came up with the idea of “logical or experimental thinking” – the ability to analyze what you already know and use that information to come to reasonable conclusions or make reasonable predictions. Ansgar treats scrolls and books as two totally different things – when in fact, they are still both just ink on parchment. If you cut the scroll up into several parts and stacked them one top of one another, you’d essentially have a book. For the most part, what is true for a scroll is true for a book, so you should be able to make predictions about books based on what you know about scrolls.

We think one key to developing these skills is regular practice in finding patterns and making predictions based on those patterns.   Knowledgeworks’ 2020 Forecast agrees that the skill of Pattern Recognition is, and will continue to be, critical to learning in the next 10-20 years. 

So our question to you is:
How do you teach pattern recognition, generalization, and logical thinking in an adult education classroom?
[We think these are HARD to teach – especially within the limits of adult literacy education.]
Any ideas? Any directions you recommend for research?

* This particular clip is about 3 years old, an English subtitled version of a video originally created for the Norwegian Broadcasting company (NRK) in 2001. It was performed on the show Øystein og jeg, starring Øystein Backe (geek) and Rune Gokstad (despondent monastic user), and written by Knut Nærum.

Posted in Meta-Skills, Technology in the Workplace | Leave a Comment »

Update to Draft 21st Century Skills List – Metacognition

Posted by durencls on April 22, 2010

Thanks to Silvia Morgan for her feedback on the Draft Skills list – about the need for self-knowledge and knowledge of others’ strengths.  Based on her feedback, I did some research and learned a bit about the definition of metacognition. I then edited/added the following two skills to our draft skill list. You can see our discussion in the comments on the  Draft 21st Century Skills page.

Metacognitive Self-Knowledge: The rate and pace of technological change  that exists currently and is expected in the future will cause stress – we think folks will need to be flexible and adapt quickly   in order to feel comfortable and be successful. Knowing yourself – your strengths and weaknesses, how you learn best, your likes and dislikes, inclinations, talents, etc. is a key to adaptability and flexibility in times of change. 

To build this skill in adult learners, you could use tools that assist them to build reflective skills – journals (with or without reflective prompts), self-questioning strategies, personality and/or learning questionnaires, evaluation rubrics, etc.

 Metacognitive Knowledge of Others:  The enormous wealth of knowledge (as well as, um, ‘drek’) available to us currently, as well as the incredibly fast rate at which it is increasing has led to an overwhelming need for collaboration – now and in the future.  The ability to determine and capitalize on others’ strengths, using them to complement your own and compensate for other’s weaknesses is an important element of collaboration and being able to reach shared goals.

To build this skill in adult learners, build cooperative/collaborative learning activities into your class activities (more on this in a later post), which allow students to see the value in working with others. Incorporate evaluative rubrics, team reflections, and/or the role of “reflector” into those activities.  Have students reflect/present on what the perceive others in the class do well (this can also assist in building esteem and pride in your students).

Like Silvia, please do not hesitate to make comments and suggestions on anything posted to the blog, or e-mail us with ideas. if  you are interested in ‘guest blogging’ on the site (or even regularly contributing) let us know!

Posted in Futurism, Meta-Skills, Teaching Ideas | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »