The new mantra, the next big thing, among educators who need
a serious sounding phrase to rattle around in reports is ‘21st
Century Skills’. I hear it often, almost always in some overlong, text-heavy,
Powerpoint presentation at an educational conference, where collaboration,
creativity, communication and emotional intelligence skills are in short supply. Thank god for wifi!
But does this idee
fixe bear scrutiny? In a nice piece of work by Stepahnie Otttenheijm, she
asked (radical eh?) some youngsters what 21st C skills they thought
they’d need. Not one of the usual suspects came up. They were less vague, much
bolder and far more realistic. Rather than these usual suspects and abstract
nouns, they wanted to know how to create and maintain a strong digital identity,
be nice, recognise what’s learnt outside school, learn how to search use my Facebook
privacy settings. My suspicion is that they know far more about this than we adults.
Collaboration and sharing
Young people communicate and collaborate every few minutes –
it’s an obsession. They text, MSN, BBM, Instagram, Facebook, Facebook message, Facebook
chat and Skype. Note the absence of email and Twitter. Then there’s Spotify,
Soundcloud, Flickr, YouTube and Bitorrent to share, tag, upload and download
experiences, comments, photographs, video and media. They also collaborate closely
in parties when playing games. Never have the young shared so much, so often in
so many different ways. Then along comes someone who wants to teach them this
so called 21st C skill, usually in a classroom, where all of this is
banned. I’m always amused at this conceit, that we adults, especially in
education, think we even have the skills we claim we want to teach. There is no
area of human endeavour that is less collaborative than education. Teaching and
lecturing are largely lone-wolf activities in classrooms. Schools, colleges and
Universities share little. Educational professionals are deeply suspicious of
anything produced outside of their classroom or their institution. The culture
of NIH (Not Invented Here) is endemic.
Communication
Again, we live in the age of abundant communication. There’s
been a renaissance in writing among young people, who have become masters at
smart, concise dialogue. The mobile has taken communication to new levels of
sophistication. They know what channel to use, in terms of whether it’s
archived or not, synchronous or asynchronous. Texts and Facebook comments are
archived, some messages are not (voice). You call people,
synchronously, when you want them to make a decision. Text is asynchronous,
therefore slower, more relaxed. They can also handle multiple, open channels at
the same time. What do we educators have to offer on this front?
Whiteboards? Some groupwork round a table? Not one
single teacher in the school my sons attend has an email address available for
parents. I’ve just attended two major European conference where only a handful
of the participants used Twitter. What do we know - really?
Problem solving
Problem solving is a complex skill and there are serious
techniques that you can learn to problem solve such as breakdown, root-cause
analysis etc. I’m not at all convinced that many subject-focussed teachers and
lecturers know what these generic techniques are. Problem solving for a maths
teacher may be factoring equations of finding a proof but they’re the last
people I’d call on to solve anything else in life. Do teachers actually know
what generic problem solving is or is it seen as some skill that is acquired through
osmosis when a group of kids get together to make a movie?
Creativity
Beware of big, abstract nouns. This one has become a cipher
for almost everything and nothing. I have no problem with art and drama departments
talking about creativity but why does creativity have to be injected into all
education. Creative people tend to struggle somewhat at school where academic
subjects and exams brand them as failures. When it comes to creativity, my own
view is that the music, drama and other creative skills my own offspring have
gained, have mostly been acquired outside of school.
Critical thinking
I have some
sympathy with this one, as critical thinking is sometimes well taught in good
schools and universities, but it needs high quality teaching and the whole
curriculum and system of assessment needs to adjust to this need. However, as
Arun has shown, there is evidence that in our Universities, this is not
happening. Arun (2011), in a study they
tracked a nationally representative sample of more than 2,000 students
who entered 24 four-year colleges, showed
that Universities were failing badly on the three skills they studied; critical
thinking, complex reasoning and communications. This research, along with
similar evidence, is laid out in their book Academically Adrift.
Digital literacy
Across the world young people have collaborated on Blogs,
Twitter, Facebook and Youtube to bring about change. Not one of them has
been on a digital literacy course. And, in any case, who are these older
teachers who know enough about digital literacy to teach these young people?
And how do they teach it – through collaborative, communication on media using
social media – NO. By and large this stuff is shunned in schools. We learn digital
literacy by doing, largely outside of academe. To be frank, it’s not something
they know much about.
Conclusion
Beneath all this, is there just a rather old, top-down,
command and control idea – that we know what’s best for them? Isn’t it just the
old master-pupil model dressed up in new clothes? In this case, I suspect they
know better. There’s a brazen conceit here, that educators know with certainty
that these are the chosen skills for the next 100 years. Are we simply fetishising
the skills of the current management class? Was there a sudden break between
these skills in the last compared to this century? No. What’s changed is the
need to understand the wider range of possible communication channels. This
comes through mass adoption and practice, not formal school and university. It is an
illusion that these skills were ever, or even can be, taught at school.
Teachers have enough on their plate without being given this burden. I’ve seen
no evidence that teachers have the disposition, or training, to teach these
skills. In fact, in universities, I’d argue that smart, highly analytic, research-driven
academics tend, in my experience, often to have low skills in these areas. , formal environment is not the answer. Pushing rounded, sophisticated, informal skills into a square, subject-defined environment is not the answer. Surely it’s our schools and universities, not young people, who need to be
dragged into the 21st century.