These statements are taken from Learner Voice, a handbook by Futurelab
• letting learners know why something is important to learn
• showing learners how to direct themselves through information
• relating the topic to the learners’ own experiences and background
• understanding learners will not learn effectively until they are ready and motivated to do so
• helping learners to overcome inhibitions, behaviours and beliefs that may represent a barrier to their effective learning.
|Is this BECTA document an example of future thinking incorporating the word personalisation but presenting a future where ICT has delivered an independent rather than personalised learning environment?
“Priority 2 asserts that traditional educational approaches have not achieved enough, and that we need to develop an understanding of how ICT can support the transformation of education so that it makes use of pedagogies appropriate to the 21st century. Central to the e-strategy is the drive for personalisation of education, so that learners are supported at times and places that are appropriate to their needs and in ways that suit their personal dispositions, in order to maximise learning outcomes.” (page 51)
I suppose I feel that ICT will follow pedagogic, curriculum and assessment changes rather than leading the change. In fact without these broader changes ICT will enshrine current practices and the ‘modern’ technology will mask the lack of actual change. This is a common situation where leaders point to children using PDAs or the new technology and make this a proof that things are changing.
|This workshop from Futurelab is a useful discussion around personalisation. It outlines key principles and opens up a conversation about how far we expect personalisation to impact the ways we currently work.|
Charles Leadbeater argues that we need to be pursuing a situation where greater outcomes are achieved through more intelligent management of resources. Those resources are people, time, space and technology. He challenges the idea that more resources = greater outcomes and sometimes more resources act against outcomes.
He includes collaboration as a major driver in personalising learning.
In this Newsnight edition they made the point that although offering choice appears to be giving the consumer/client/service user/child/patient what they want, it is in fact an admission that the public sector is limited in what it can provide. The public doesn’t have whatever it needs, the “public wants what the public gets”. So when we hear talk of choice as a means of greater personalisation what we are actually being offered is a menu of whatever options can be funded or what the system can offer. Not the best of all possible worlds, just the best that can be offered and even then the best that anyone has come up with.
|This is taken from a 2007 speech by Jim Knight:|
“What does personalisation actually mean in practice?
So far, it’s been one of those ideas where everyone thinks they know what it means, everyone thinks they are already doing it, and everyone means something different. It doesn’t mean individualisation – expecting teachers to teach every child in their class completely differently. Nor is it as simple as different worksheets for different abilities. It’s a common sense approach between those polar opposites. Continue reading
Tim Rudd (Futurelab) writes in his blog about ‘tick box’ personalisation delivery where a new name is given to existing approaches. In fact in a recent personalisation training day the idea was that, “you are doing lots of this already”. Indeed we may be, but it isn’t having the transforming change that everyone hopes personalisation may offer.