Do we exist in an educational echo chamber?

One outcome of being part of something as exciting as setting up a brand new school is that you find yourself explaining (or at least attempting to) the underlying philosophy of the said school. Whilst we are still wrangling with the precise wording of the vision and principles I do have fairly strong personal philosophies about education that (I think) reflect those of the school...I mean, I assume that's why I got the job? Isn't it? I know I value student engagement, creativity, future focus, innovation, collaboration and differentiated or personalised learning. I know I care deeply about professional development, teaching as inquiry and the thoughtful integration of e-learning tools and strategies.

However, I am also aware that I am very good at surrounding myself, in both a digital and physical sense, with educators who hold similar views and share similar passions to mine.

This leads to me to my latest edu-conundrum. Is our ability to curate our reading/listening/viewing through platforms such as Twitter and RSS feeds etc. actually just creating a an echo chamber that simply amplifies what (I think) I know to be true. Is this ability to manipulate and control our information flow actually narrowing our views and preventing us to from challenging and questioning these beliefs? Then, on top of this, particularly if you are a bit of an edu-geek and 'professionaldevelopmentophile' like me, you also attend many (and I mean MANY) conferences (and unconferences) that do little more than reinforce these beliefs and passions. The converted happily preaching to the converted. We might share, discuss and even debate, but really, we do so within a safe wee haven that only represents a small portion of a much broader educational sector. I can't even use the "but my beliefs are backed by research" card, because lets be fair, you can find research to support most things, and history has shown how misguided and even deadly this can be.


I know (I think) I can be safe in my beliefs if I undertake an inquiry and/or research so as to measure outcomes, based on interventions informed by these beliefs...but even that is hard to prove as being evidence that MY beliefs are "right" and could actually, at least in part, be influenced by a number of other factors.

So where does that leave us?

How do I actually go about ensuring I am genuinely challenging my educational beliefs, ideas, values?

Do I even need to?
I suspect I do.

Or is the realisation that I might be stuck in an an educational echo chamber actually enough?
I suspect it isn't.

Comments

  1. UnknownFebruary 6, 2013 at 9:08 PM

    Whew! Most of, if not all, what I am reading is saying the same thing. None of it is saying let's do more of the same.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Claire AmosFebruary 6, 2013 at 9:21 PM

      See what happens when you give me "time to de-school" Maurie! I get all deep and meaningful and rather navel gaze-y. You've unleashed the ponderer in me! :)

      Delete
    2. UnknownFebruary 7, 2013 at 8:23 PM

      Hey Claire, I know what you mean. Today's technology makes it very easy to find people and research to support already held views and positions. It creates tribes of people of like minds so it is easy to think everyone thinks the same way. This is very comfortable. However it is also easy to find other viewpoints or critiques if you want to. The point is you have to deliberately seek counter points yourself. This can be a useful exercise because sometimes reading counter views can more easily clarify tour key values and "non negotiables" than continually read things saying the same things.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The National, Act and NZ First Coalition and what it means for education

Image
Photo Source Yesterday saw the announcement of a new government which came with a raft of new policies and ministerial appointments. The Minister of Education, as was expected, is National MP Erica Stanford. More interestingly was the number of policies and priorities two parties who only collectively gained 15.5% of the votes managed to get across the line.  The common threads across both Act and NZ First included some good old-fashioned back-to-basics, a focus on compulsory attendance and cracking down on truancy, increased focus on academic achievement and shifting the fees-free policy from the first of uni to the last. To be fair, none of these represent much of a departure from what National was touting anyway.  The interesting and, at times, worrying changes suggest Luxon was willing to let both Act and NZ First foist their ideologies on innocent schools and students for the sake of a "strong and stable" government.  Unsurprisingly Act got Partnership Schools across the
Read more

National, Act and the age of standardisation in education

Image
Chris and David discussing the joy of testing. Whilst we are still awaiting the outcome of special votes, it is pretty safe to assume that we are staring down the barrel of a National / Act Party government that will be bringing a very distinct flavour to the education landscape. Below is an outline of what each party promised for education.  Front and centre is a focus on "back to basics" and what looks like a whole lot more standardisation (from both National and Act) and testing to ensure we are all "teaching the basics brilliantly". Those of us in schools know that standardisation isn't necessarily the answer and testing didn't seem to turn the dial in the past either. That is the trouble when policies are designed to satisfy parent voters who just want their kids back in school and succeeding.  In their 100-day plan, National is promising to do the following in the education space: Require primary and intermediate schools to teach one hour a day each of
Read more

Assessment in the Age of AI - Claire Amos

Image
Below are the slides I shared at NZQA's 'Assessment in the Age of AI' symposium.   This is my brief overview of how we are approaching AI at Albany Senior High School and some of the concerns and some of thoughts I have about the topic.  In short, I am worried we are so damn busy we aren't giving it the attention it needs. I also worry that leaders will try and ignore and/or attempt to ban and that this ignores the fact that Pandora's Box is well and truly opened and this thing is developing faster than we can imagine and is increasingly woven into platforms and tools we already use. We are sitting at a fork in the path where both options lead to a world fundamentally altered by AI and we need to choose whether to work with it or stick our heads in the sand. That decision is going to have a tangible impact on how well our young people are going to be equipped to thrive in the future.  We need to embrace AI, and approach it with curiosity, criticality and care.  One
Read more