James dalziel - learning design and open source teaching  (Page 16/18)

The level of complexity in LD sequences constrains reusability and possibly works against the mass production of free content. How do we overcome these barriers?

Cheers, Wayne

13. james dalziel - may 24th, 2007 at 12:07 am

Given that most of the work on Learning Design exists outside the US, Ken asks whether there are any particular barriers to adoption of Learning Design software that I’ve encountered in the US. I don’t have a clear answer to this, but I’ll pick on one of the factors that most worries me about US education.

Automated Testing.

I find the extensive use of automated testing in the US amazing, especially in K-12. Some of the most important lessons of education cannot easily be tested in an automated way - for example:

• the ability to hear arguments other than those you already believe and consider these carefully (and potentially change you view);
• the ability to work in teams to think creatively about solving a problem;
• the ability to express your ideas clearly in written or oral form
• the ability to research a new problem to find out what is already known about it so that you can approach the problem with greater knowledge than you can achieve by thinking on your own;
• an understanding of an individual’s role in society, and the interconnection of business, the environment, politics and culture;
• an appreciation of beauty, music and art;
• a sense of the lessons of history for modern dilemmas;
• an understanding of the development of science and its strengths (and limits);
• an ability to understand and contrast cultures and religions other than your own;
• an understanding of your own ethics and values, and how these relate to those of others;

…and the list could go on. The point is that many educators would agree that a rich education should achieve learning of the kind described above, not just memory of the facts that can be tested in a multiple choice quiz. And it is important to note that it is possible for a teacher to assess learning of the kind outlined above, but not via a quiz (and also not perfectly - but see comments below on reliability).

The assessment required for the learning described above is often formative, not just summative; a dialogue between student and teacher, not just a judgement; and most importantly, time consuming for a real human being (the teacher), not a process that can be outsourced to a machine. In essence, it is an attempt at authentic assessment.

Some of the pedagogical approaches that are best supported by Learning Design (as compared to other e-learning approaches) may not fit with a culture of automated testing. And given that students will focus their learning on the methods used to assess them (and increasingly teachers simply “teach to the test”), then I sense there are structural barriers to a greater realisation of the benefits of a Learning Design approach that arise from US assessment practices. The frightening dimension of this is that if our students only learn what we can test via automated testing, then they may not become the well-rounded people we hope to see graduate from our educational systems. This may ultimately be detrimental to our society and our world.