Chinese teachers drug pupils to get bonuses

I have come across some hideous features of Chinese education, and written about its deep roots in Confucian thinking, but this one takes some beating. ALL children (170 million) in China, are about to be drug tested. Why? According to this shocking story in The Telegraph, teachers have been handing out dated, untested anti-viral drugs like sweets to stop the kids getting ill, as their bonuses are paid on attendance. You’d think this was bad enough but some of the parents, shown here, who turned up to the school where this practice was first uncovered have been arrested, held in custody and told that they must delete all online comments about the affair.

Shocking as this story is, it fits into an educational narrative that we in the west are also buying, that education is the primary goal for children and that everything else needs to be subsumed under that goal. The Far eastern model, which politicians in the west admire is not what it seems. It’s based on a dog-eat-dog competition driven by desperate parents, with hideous amounts of tutoring and homework. Children have become instruments of parental ambition, even worse state ambition.

We’ve seen this before in East Germany, when children were selected then force-fed steroids to compete in international games such as the Olympics. This led to serious physical and psychological problems including suicides. Do we want to go back to state and Stasi imposed regimes in education and sport.

We should be under no doubt that China sees education as a political tool. It’s easy to forget that this is a totalitarian state, with communist roots, the same party that almost wiped out its teachers and academics in my lifetime during the Cultural Revolution. They know all about state control.

PISA propaganda

The propaganda is now propagated through PISA rankings. Unwittingly, PISA has become a vehicle for far Eastern politics. They should never have allowed Shanghai to submit an entry. It is not representative of the whole country, tutoring as a variable is not included, and there is widespread concern about selection and cheating. The OECD PISA data comes from exams held every three years. In 2012, Shanghai and Hong Kong came first and second. The problem is the vast differential between these two cities and the rest of China.

1.     Around 84% of Shanghai secondary school students go on to college, compared to 24% in the rest of China.

2.      Parents in those wealth cities pay enormous sums for tutoring, sometimes so extreme that the child does little else but eat, sleep and study.

3.     In addition, only 79% of 15 year olds in Shanghai get into high school, making it a highly selective sample.

4.     These wealthy hotspots are then represented as ‘China’. Given this differential. I’d guess that China would barely make it above the mean if it were truly representative of the country as a whole.

Conclusion

We had the enlightenment in the West and don’t follow the idea that children are simply rats that have to spend all of their waking life being drilled, practiced and tested into being the narcissistic toys that their parents want them to be. I always found it depressing to hear parents in this country refer to their kids as ‘talented and gifted’. In fact, I rarely ever met a middle class parent whose kid was not ‘talented and gifted’. This soon gave way to the usual issues that all 

Gang-of-four’s Serious eLearning manifesto – all a bit melodramatic?

I don’t fault the ideas presented but I honestly think, as one tweeter said, that it was all ‘a bit melodramatic’, and although we were promised something radical, what we got was, in the words of a tweet from Nick Shackleton Jones, something that reminded us ‘of the things we were saying 10 years ago’. A ‘manifesto’ suggests something new and radical, not a rehash of ideas that have been around for many, many years. There was not a single idea here that was new or even surprising. It was all a bit ‘is the Pope a Catholic’.

Problem of the ‘C’ word

For me, it all seemed trapped in the world of corporate ‘courses’. I didn’t hear much on more open forms of learning or open source, curation and the genuine revolution in learning that has taken place through informal techniques and social media. Others, such as Fiona Quigley, found it ‘hard to take 'industry hasn't improved' when e-learning is so broad’. This may be to do with the US-centric presenters, where content does tend to be commoditized, a bit like US cheese; over-processed, bland, mild and comes in three colours, orange, yellow and white.

God’s in the detail

For me, I found the whole thing a bit weird and said so before the launch. What came ended up being remarkably like the thing they were attacking a 58 min content, author-led, attendance-driven, knowledge-led, didactic talk that, in format, list of stab points. Sure it was a launch, not a course, but where were the stunning examples, the real meat, the real detail? Simply repeating the word ‘performance’ isn’t enough. It isn’t easy learning and assessing performance online. Also, no mention of costs, as all of these recommendations have cost implications. (I had to fast forward during the ramble on multi-tasking.)

Here’s some ideas (not a manifesto) for a more radical approach to change. As I think God’s in the detail. I’ve been more specific and tried to give real examples.

1. Clean out

Take a broom to the terrible theory that hangs around in learning and e-learning, such as learning objectives stated up front on courses, learning styles, Kirkpatrick and so on.

2. Specific mistakes in e-learning

There is the classic use (misuse) of merely illustrative stock graphics and images with text alongside. Even worse, unedited blocks of text. Unnecessary expensive but not instructive animation. Text on screen while playing identical audio. Inconsistent navigation. Multiple choice questions on nouns from text. Annoying music and sound effects. Corporate crap and educational hubris. Above all condescension through childish cartoons and language. We know a lot about this stuff – so let’s tell people.

3. Curation of open content – focus not so much on expensive, custom-built content but resources that are open and free, on the likes of YouTube and use MOOCs for vocational subjects. Think of YouTube as a learning platform

4. Open source tools – open source tools such as the open source, responsive authoring language Adapt and the Totara the corporate LMS, based on Moodle. This could save corporations oodles of cash.

5. Look to adaptive tools

Look to the new world of tools that provide responsive delivery, such as Adapt, and algorithmic, adaptive learning to personalise learning based on real data about that learners and other learners, basically using a Satnav for learning journeys. See Cogbooks

6. Simulations for training & assessment

Use simulations to learn and assess real competences as opposed to text and graphics that pretend to teach competences. These examples, not only train, they assess and play a major role in certification. See these retail and gas inspection sims

7. Spaced practice on mobiles

Spaced practice is not about delivery within a short course. Use mobile devices, not to deliver learning content but to do what ENCORE does, deliver ‘cues’ across a chosen period, after the learning experience. Spaced practice research goes back to 1885 & is being implemented and it’s not about within but after the learning experience. This is about increased retention 

Conclusion

Sure there’s lots of poor, basic content around, but that’s true in any medium – movies, books, TV and classroom training. This is a big and diverse field and simply knocking those who produce basic stuff for basic budgets is an east win. This is not about top-down manifestos. It’s about on-going, dynamic dialogue and sharing.

Flipped reading – 7 reasons why reading just got super-fast

Education often slows down learning. One reason I’m not for the current orthodoxy in social constructivism is the fact that it slows down many types of learning for many people. My efficiencies in learning over the years have come from the fact that my learning is digital by default, asynchronous by default, available to anyone, anywhere at anytime. So imagine being able to read five or more times faster. Typical experienced reading rates are between 200-400 words per minute. Can this be increased to 1000 words per minute, adding not subtracting attention and comprehension? Try it.

1. Reading shaped by old inefficient tech

We may not realise it but papyrus, parchment and paper are technologies, wasteful technologies at that, especially paper with its polluting, deforestation and landfill problems. Remember that a book is not the physical object but the text. Fact is, most of us do most of our reading online these days. That’s solved these problems but it may also solve another – speed. Reading has been shaped by papyrus, parchment and paper. They remain fixed, while your eyes have to do all the work. Now, along comes a technology that literally flips that model. The words move, not your eyes.

2. Much faster reading

Speed reading software from Spritz works because they’ve looked carefully at what actually happens when we read. We all have an optimal attention point when reading words, which is just left of centre of each word. This is the point (Optimal Recognition Point) at which the brain centres then registers the meaning of the word. The software knows this recognition point for words and presents that letter in red at exactly the same point on the screen. Your eyes don’t have to move so time and effort is saved. Try it – it’s remarkably effective.

3. Text-based learning

One basic skill is still primary in learning – reading. Let’s face it, much of our learning, even communication and collaboration is still through text. Google, Wikipedia, e-books, texting, Facebook, Twitter, email are all still fundamentally text media. Increasing this mode of learning is therefore a significant productivity win.

4. Quicker & better comprehension

They even claim quicker and increased comprehension and I can see why. The effortless focus means you can attend to meaning rather than the effort of physical reading from a page.

5. More psychological attention

The fact that you are having to do less physical work means that psychological attention is focussed. Attention is a necessary condition for learning. It wanes in lectures and wanes when reading. This massively extends your ability to sustain that attention.
6. Language learning
I could see this work well with language learning in terms of quickening up vocabulary and sentence acquisition. It should also work with Arabic if the same rules about Optimal Recognition Point apply (interesting question). It could even be used to increase early reading skills by accelerating reading and vocabulary acquisition.

7. Power up with wearables

The fact that it can be delivered on small mobile screens, Google Glass and watches. You have no scrolling, paging, contracting and expanding. In fact, it has been announced as a feature of the Galaxy S5 and Galaxy Gear 2. Now imagine it being delivered on an Oculus Rift for total psychological attention and no distractions.

Conclusion

Breakthroughs often come by flipping or reversing models. These ‘Copernican’ revolutions have changed the world forever. Thomas Khun saw this as the key driver in scientific progress but it has also been noted that it works on a smaller scale with technology. One could argue that it works particularly well in learning. The flipped classroom is just one example, flipped reading may be another.

Gang-of-four proclaim Serious eLearning Manifesto. You can’t be serious?

The ‘Serious eLearning Manifesto’ has been procaimed! Well, four people have decided that a ‘top-down’ approach, where we mere  mortals need to stand by, with baited breath, by signing-up for the ‘revealing’ special webinar on 13 March. Am I alone in thinking that this is all a bit, well, odd? 

Gang-of-four

Let me be clear, I like three of the ‘gang-of-four’ – Michael Allen, Clark Quinn and Wil Thalheimer. All are seasoned veterans with lots of great things to say. I won’t express an opinion on the fourth, Julie Dirksen, as I’ve never heard of her. What I find odd is the idea that we all need to be told by a self-appointed group what’s best for the rest of us. It goes against everything I love about the openess of the web and online learning – the fact that it should be diverse and that if you have something to say – blog it, tweet it, Facebook it and put it on your website. Don't treat us like pupils in a classroom and expect us to turn up at 2pm CST and listen.

Manifesto madness

I, for one, don’t like manifestos. Remember the last one from this forsome? They stink. They tend to be ideological, reflecting the views of the few not the many. They also tend to be fixed, prescriptive and usually don’t last the test of time. E-learning is not high politics, it’s an evolving and fluid landscape with a raft of wonderful tools used by almost everyone on the web: Google, Wikpedia, YouTube, Social Media etc. If it’s the basic modular, self-paced e-learning they want to attack, then hold on. As Bertie Bassett would say, it takes all-sorts. You can point out the weaknesses of certain forms of online learning but this is hardly a catastrophe. If they’re also having a go at the LMS, then think again, as it’s as lively and buoyant as it’s ever been and evolving. The logo maybe says it all - SERIOUSLY is this the future of e-learning design? Smacks of the 'serious' games thing and look where that concept went. I made much the same points six years ago on that concept.
Manifestos galore
It's not as if this is the first. We've had Cathy Moore's Manifesto for L&D Professionsals. I can still remember the truly awful Manifesto for e-learning from bogus Learning Light in the UK. There's the Networked Learning Manifesto from the University of Lancaster, the Educator's e-learning manifesto, even a Feminist manifesto for e-learning. There's the wonderful Manifesto for e-learning in acupuncture. You get my point.

Bullseye!

What I suspect will happen, is that they’ll fire an arrow, draw a chalk circle round it and proclaim ‘Bullseye!’ I’m involved in simulations, adaptive algorithmic learning projects, MOOCs, VOOKs, content exchanges, spaced learning on mobiles, Oculus Rift VR, wearables and see a landscape that is wide and rich. What I don't see as radical is a fixed webinar at a fixed time by a self-selected group. This is regressive not progressive.

Big world

Listen guys, I respect you all, but calm down on the drama and, tell us what you think - asynchronously. I don’t want to have to hang around to listen to a fixed webinar, timed for the US market. Just blog it. And if you do want a ‘manifesto’, at least appoint someone who is not US based. It’s a big world out here. We in Europe are having serious doubts about allowing any data to be held, no matter how virtualised, in the US, as the NSA has managed to ruin the brand.
PS
My guess is that somewhere in here, they're really plugging a book - let's see.

Miracle of mobiles delivers cued spaced-practice (ENCORE)

This tool (ENCORE) uses mobile devices to deliver cued spaced-practice for learning. In my view, tools like this are a major breakthrough in learning technology, as it is founded on a solid piece of psychological research and sound memory theory.

Mobile learning sceptic

I’ve always been a bit sceptical about the claims made for mobile learning. I’m a mobile learner, as I don’t drive, so I take trains a lot, but I don’t use a mobile phone for my mobile learning. In fact, I don’t think I’ve even seen anyone do an e-learning course on the train. However, I am a fan of using specific device affordances for learning. That’s why I’m fine with tablets in primary schools but not in secondary or FE/HE for long form writing, coding or using sophisticated tools. That’s where you need a notebook or laptop.

Mobile affordances

For mobiles the affordances are around quick, episodic events such as looking things up, quick experiences, learning games or alerts. The average time someone spends on a mobile device is seconds, and it’s getting shorter as txting on Whatsapp or whatever, overtakes voice. What seemed like a suicidal price by Facebook, now looks like a steal considering the geographic spread and ability to use Whatsapp for voice. Coming back to my point – we use mobiles for short, episodic experiences.

Forgetting curve

For years I’ve been talking about the need to move learning beyond the course in one specific way – repeated practice. It had become an obsession. Finally I got a chance to implement htis through LearningPool. Ebbinhaus in 1885 gave us the forgetting curve, showing that most of what we supposedly teach and learn is lost within minutes and hours. Learning is therefore one of the most unproductive areas of human endeavour. The trick is to look beyond the course and learning experience to the reinforcement of that knowledge and skills. To truly move learning from working to long-term memory we need to reinforce to increase retention and recall.

Miracle of mobiles

This has never really been possible in learning, as we lose the students attention as soon as they walk out of the door. Suddenly a miracle has happened, we all have the perfect device (well almost) – mobile phones. These powerful, personal and portable devices that can deliver personalised learning at anytime, anywhere to me alone. I mooted this idea with LearningPool some time ago, and with their characteristic ‘can do’ attitude they’ve come up with a tool that works – ENCORE.

Cues

ENCORE, takes the ‘cues’ from any course or learning experience and spaced them out in whatever frequency you want after the course to and end date. It may be up to the start of a new job, an exam, a product launch, whatever. This word ‘cue’ is important. It is not a matter of replaying the course but identifying key ‘cues’ like the handles of suitcases, so that the brain uses these cues to pull out the suitcases of knowledge and skills.

Tulving has shown that Episodic memories are encoded through cues that overlap the memories themselves. These cues allow retrieval. The theory therefore explains memory failure, not so much in terms of memory decay, as failure in retrieval. Research on cues and retrieval has shown that context and physical environment do improve memory, encouraging the view that learning should take place in the context in which it is likely to be used. Semantic memories may be turned into episodic memories through loci and peg systems. For examples historical sequences placed along a known route. Encoding is perhaps the one area of memory theory that has the most direct impact on learning, as understanding encoding can led to both better teaching and better learning. Tulving showed the importance of cues and when learners make the effort to identify and note down cues they improve retention (an obvious example is mnemonics). We now know the difference between maintenance and elaborative encoding strategies. (Elaborative encoding leads to deeper processing and therefore better learning.) We also know that the organisation of learning is important in terms of relating new learning to previous knowledge, emotional and context. All of this hold great promise when it comes to the sophisticated use of cues and elaboration through mobile spaced-practice.

Conclusion

My guess is as this develops significant increases in retention and productivity will be realised.  We can remind learners about tasks, activities and push snippets of learning topics to them at timed intervals. We can insert new life into previous learning with bite-size tasks and activities to help refresh the learners’ mind. We can emphasise and fortify knowledge of learning topics with catch up and repetitive learning and research shows clear benefits in the thing that really matters retention.