Cross-posted with the OSD: Learning for the Future Blog
Myth: Technology = Personalized Learning
One
misconception about personalized learning is that it is all about
technology. While it is true that technology offers some tools that make
it possible to mass-customize learning for a large group of students, I
sometimes hear people say that until every student has a technology
device, we can't personalize at all.
I
understand how this misconception forms. Schools that have implemented
personalized learning at a large scale (i.e., for all students) use
technology to accomplish it. Also, technology tends to be one of the
more visible, obvious components of a classroom, especially in contrast
to classrooms of twenty years ago.
However, consider whether you agree with the following statement, which is a rephrasing of the misconception:
"Without technology, it's impossible to make learning personal."
This
is obviously false. Babies learn to walk and talk without technology.
We learn from our relationships and interactions with each other,
regardless of whether we use technology to do so. (We can talk face to
face, write a letter with paper and pencil, talk on the phone, send
email, or video conference. All are communication, but with varying
levels of technology.)
Throughout
history, people have learned from mentors. Children who lived on farms
learned farming from their parents. Apprentices learned trades from
master tradespeople. The rich and elite learned from personal tutors.
None of these require what we would consider "technology" today. So
clearly, learning can be personally meaningful without using modern
technology.
Individual
mentoring has long been shown to increase student achievement. Thirty
years ago, Benjamin Bloom identified one-to-one tutoring as the most
effective way to increase student achievement. But how do you find an
individual tutor for every child?
This
is where technology actually does help. Although simply giving
technology to students doesn't make it any more personalized (and if
done wrong can actually inhibit the learning process), it is necessary
in order to bring technology to full-scale implementation. One teacher
described it this way:
"I can personalize a unit for one class - no problem. But that's the tip of the iceberg. If you multiply that one class by my six classes, and multiply the one unit by 36 units, it shows the overwhelming iceberg under the water. Technology doesn't make learning personal, but technology is necessary to be able to sustain personalization for all students."
So
this may seem like a contradiction, because I started off saying that
technology does not equal personal learning, but now I'm saying that
technology is required. The important difference is that technology
alone doesn't make it personal; but technology is needed to personalize.
CESA #1 describes the role of technology as:
"...contrary to the assumptions of many, personalized learning is not technology driven. Rather technology is employed thoughtfully and strategically to support learning in the most effective and appropriate ways possible from the perspective of the learner. Personalized learning environments can be enhanced and made more efficient and learning options can be expanded with technology, but at the core, it is the shift in the roles of learners and educators and the employment of key learning and teaching processes that make the difference."
It is possible
to get started personalizing with minimal technology. As the scope and
scale of personalization increases, teachers use technology to perform
some of the clerical or algorithmic tasks, which frees up their time to
meet individually with students. The impetus for technology use should
always be to increase efficiency and to support learner ownership.
For more information about Personalized Learning in the Oregon School District, see http://pli.oregonsd.net
