The Future, Education, and the Inertia to Change

1. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

2. NERAUniversity of Helsinki  March 9th 2016 The future, education and the inertia to changethe problem of changing curricular content  Jón Torfi Jónasson, School of Education, University of Iceland jtj@hi.is

3. From an ongoing study on upper secondary schools in Iceland, here concentrating on school leaders (GR, JTJ): A school leader, describing new programme lines within natural sciences, notes “we have essentially not changed the content”. This is in line with another school leader describing how teachers “carry on with the old and try to adjust it” so far as they can. Another laments his interaction with “the math teachers because they don´t want to change”. They use “outdated methods … outdated material… outdated textbooks, ….” Examples to illustrate a predicament A report commissioned by the board on physics and astronomy of the National Research Council (U.S) states in 2013 that impediments to change include “traditional academic cultures” and that the “subject matter and skills that undergraduates study [in physics] have remained largely static for more than 50 years” (p. 2). Lingard, B., & McGregor, G. (2013). New Basics, a progressive curriculum „constructed around a desired imagined future, rather than around disciplinary knowledge“ (p. 212). “Sadly, in our considered view, the New Basics have passed into the dustbin of Queensland educational history” (p.225). Lingard, B., & McGregor, G. (2013). High Stakes Assessment and NewCurricula: A QueenslandCase of CompetingTensions in CurriculumDevelopment. In M. Priestley & G. Biesta (Eds.), Reinventingthecurriculum : newtrends in curriculumpolicy and practiceLondon: BloomsburyPub. Reinventing the curriculum: Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

4. Where are we now within education? On balance? How is the school system addressing the past, the present and the future? Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

5. A schematic diagram indicating the way many people think (implicitly) about education, accepting a relatively sensible description for the 1950’s A much more appropriate description or conceptual framework would be (note, we are hinting at 5 x 20 year periods): TE Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

6. Topics for presentation Another presentation! • Introduction • The future and education • Aims - Powerful knowledge • Is something happening? • Reforms - Changes • Many reforms, change edifice • Classification of reforms • My emphasis on content and tools • Inertia • Generalization? • The categories of inertia • How to address these issues of inertia? • Theoretical frames? Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

7. Introduction The future and education There is extraordinary (often exponential) growth in many spheres (not only science, technology, e.g. artificial intelligence, genetics, biomedical research, … -every field), in the use of natural resources, social changes, cultural changes, labour market changes – changes that we could respond to proactively, in order to tackle a host of challenges. Aims - (New) Powerful knowledge and competencies Education seems to be strangely oblivious to these developments, and is not gauging what is happening in a systematic way and thus not contemplating what powerful knowledge or powerful competencies should be taught as a part of the new basics – or rather, the new general education. Is something happening? Yes, there are clear signs of various “new” competencies being sensibly introduced – as in the “new basics”, but in practice rather as an add on to the time honored subjects, which still hold the center stage. The aims are thus being partly reconsidered, and also the pedagogy, but not the substance. And the new curriculum is having a rough time. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

8. Reforms Much change, there is practically an “educational change edifice” A enormous amount has been written on educational change, educational reforms and often as if it were a monolithic concept, which it clearly is not. But the recent literature seems to be largely about the system, the whole of it or parts of it and about leadership, how leaders shall administer, organize, motivate, in order to – in the end - make students obtain better results even if the content is obsolete. It is also about pedagogy which is very important. - Not necessarily about grasping new totally new ideas or work completely differently. The terms Question if we should use the term reform, change, development or perhaps innovation, - which the changes rarely are. Some of the changes are not positive, may even be negative and outright harmful. Classification of reforms - changes First order, second order, - incremental, fundamental, (Cuban, 1992); Waks (2007) emphasizes the difference between organizational and institutional changes and talks also about the depth and magnitude of change. I think it may also be important to note, on whose platform or in whose territory changes take, or could take place. I think most of the changes I am interested in belong to the institutional category (not all), but the ownership of the territory to which they mainly belong, varies. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

9. Reforms - change The reform literature is somewhat cluttered. It needs disentanglement, as there are so many different reform discourses taking place. In the following I point to two major categories of discourses, and within each, at least two sub-categories. I also emphasize that I am focusing on one of these even though they are all tied together to some extent, and my focus is not always clear. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

10. Reforms? – changes, different discourses • Changes in aims and content • Procedural changes Macro level: School mergers, (de)centralization, inclusion moves, privatization, testing regimes, accountability, evaluation mechanisms, … • National curricula, now often emphasizing capacities or competencies, (even dispositions?) Mesolevel: leadership, school improvement, also retention, school culture, … • (National) curricula emphasizing changes in content, new subjects, new tools, new ideas, new content skills, … • Micro level: Learning environments, collaboration, ICT influx, pedagogic influences – new teaching methods, … Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

11. Curricular emphasis 1. Pedagogy: Ways of teaching and learning 2. Generic skills, competencies 3. Tools, many of which are tied to technology 4. “New” principles, theories, facts; new disciplinary and interdisciplinary subjects New? aims, challenges and affordances My emphasis here Four intersecting domains of emphasis: • Pedagogy, how we teach and learn • Various generic skills, learning to learn, judge, create, .. • Various new modes of operation, e.g. using technology • New principles, theories, facts - new knowledge Powerful curriculum is a combination of all three Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

12. Change - reforms Some things are difficult to change – mercifully, some would say. Here I turn to the issue of inertia or the difficulty to move, or to change the pace – with the focus on tools and content – but on related facets as well. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

13. Inertia - categories? • General conservatism • The system • Standards, accountability • New ideas are fuzzy or impractical • The old ideas (subjects) are still good? • Vested interests • Teacher education • No space for initiative • No consequence • What is (not) happening elsewhere? • Lack of information • Foresight is narrow • Research is conservative • The logistics of change within education Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

14. Inertial - categories Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

15. Categories of inertia General conservatism - not least related to content Is found in all groups, - students, parents, politicians, teachers, academics – there is perhaps a particular resistance to change what people learnt themselves – for several reasons (other things may be changed). The system of education Its function is to be stable, set rules, standards, be transparent; thus it is geared not to change. It is an effective gatekeeper, most often using substantive entrance criteria between levels. It has the credential power, which exerts an overwhelming control. Standards, test regimes have massive effects, literally standardize, and here they de-professionalize teachers (those who might want to introduce new substantive ideas) and they crowd out new subjects. In particular they are inimical to anything very new. There is a critical contradiction inherent in enforcing standards and the connected accountability on the one hand and encouraging individualized creative and entrepreneurial teaching on the other; either is not to be taken seriously. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

16. Categories of inertia New ideas are fuzzy or alien There are new “subjects” such as Unesco’s sustainability curriculum; previously there was the “New Maths”, and a host of interdisciplinary subjects. The modern trend is perhaps also to emphasize competencies and dispositions; some of which are difficult to inter-weave with subjects, uncertain how to teach anyway and don’t fit into the testing regime. - The basic idea behind them is still important and good – to an extent. (See most of the “new curriculum discourse”.) The old ideas (subjects) are still good? E.g. the structural aspect of subjects. Of course it is still valuable to teach mathematics, grammar, spelling, physics, chemistry, natural history, perhaps Latin, etc. The problem arises when they are judged in absolute, rather than relative terms. The Greek and Latin classical texts were sometimes high quality educational material. Nevertheless they had - finally - to give way to the new languages and the natural sciences. See discussion in Young (various places, e.g. 2014). Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

17. Categories of inertia Vested interests – traditional values – the curricular institution Perhaps the major inhibitor? There are a number, closely related; specialists want to keep their subjects, their content – which they cherish and know so well, and they want minimum hassle due to constant changes. Tyack and Cuban’s, “grammar of schooling” and “how schools change reforms” are also a part of this story. Teacher education Initial TE is very often subject based, except for the first grades, fragmented and perhaps pedagogical, but lacking fundamental educational discourse and vision? The teachers are sometimes subject specialists, with a pedagogical addendum. CPD does probably not take this into account – or on the contrary? No space for taking the initiative In order to take the initiative, school leaders and teachers must have time and operational space to master any new ideas to the extent of being able (gradually) to implement them, successfully. This is perhaps overlooked where there is a sensible strive to re-professionalize teachers. But schools and teachers also have to join forces among themselves, and with others, in order to establish a critical mass for sustained change. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

18. Categories of inertia No consequence - if nothing is done If the content or aims of schooling of young people is not changed it will of course not be noticed – yet, or ever? And in fact what may be lost due to inactivity will never be known because we will not have done the controlled experiment. Nothing is happening elsewhere If nothing much is happening elsewhere, why should we do much. Many governments have changed their national curriculum towards competence base; but not much visible change in content in the traditional subjects. On the contrary, many countries are trying to do well on the same mathematics tests. Lack of information Because we have not systematically gathered the important information and gauged the foreseeable future, we haven’t the impetus (nor the competence) to change much what we teach. The weight of this factor is somewhat paradoxical. Foresight is narrow Much of the general curricular discussion is directed towards the labour market, the world of work, but scientific, social, ethical and cultural issues are somewhat neglected. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

19. Categories of inertia Research is conservative – or neutral – very unhelpful 1) The channels for research are not open into the teaching arena. 2) And even if they were, what do we expect teachers to do with the results, which are, to say the least, very complex? 3) The “what works” movement is a very conservative force. 4) Research is normally looking at the past, e.g. at what has not worked. It says preciously little about what we should or might do. 5) it is not clear if there is much research pitting new content vs. new. 6) If these were not problems, the volume of research is simply overwhelming, making it impossible for practioners to be aware of but a tiny fraction. The logistics of change within education There seem to be several ways to engender or enable change, but the logistic problem is formidable – except perhaps if the professional capacity of the teachers would be harnessed. In 2010 the 0-15 world population was 1850 million, which means that each cohort was about 115 million. Given that the trend is towards 30 pupils per class that might mean 4 million teachers per cohort, or 50 million teachers for 12 cohorts. Introducing new ideas on a regular basis is a daunting task. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

20. Issues to note Rhetorical, formal change vs. change: When is change a change? There are examples of changes in the discourse, which are not transformed into explicit policy; there are policy documents such as curricula that are not transformed into school practice, in particular into classroom practice. The question is how interested should we be in curricular documents, when trying to gauge educational change? Or erroneously to think changes have taken place? Classification in terms of territory or “jurisdiction” It may be important to determine if the discussion about subject content is partly seen to be inside the jurisdiction of academia and the subject teachers, and others are not expected to touch it. Thus when discussing educational change, we are perhaps not including the traditional national curricula, or core curricula in the discussion (or the decision to teach reading in kindergarten?). If we respect this we can add on whatever we like – but these additions may well be marginalized. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

21. Is it useful to attempt to identify he actual inhibitors? • Direct inhibitors • Neutral – unhelpful • *General conservatism • *The system • *Standards, accountability • *New ideas are fuzzy or impractical • *The old ideas (subjects) are still good? • *Vested interests • *Teacher education • *No space for initiative • No consequence • What is (not) happening elsewhere? • Lack of information • Foresight is narrow • Research is conservative • The logistics of change within education Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

22. Is it useful to identify the different domains of the discourse? • Direct inhibitors • Neutral – unhelpful • *General conservatism • *The system • *Standards, accountability • *New ideas are fuzzy or impractical • *The old ideas (subjects) are still good? • *Vested interests • *Teacher education • *No space for initiative • No consequence • What is (not) happening elsewhere? • Lack of information • Foresight is narrow • Research is conservative • The logistics of change within education • System level • School – teacher level • Teacher education Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

23. Summary • There is a lot of discussion about educational change, but the discussion seems to me to be multifaceted (unfocussed?), often not distinguishing between very different types or levels of changes. • There is relatively little discussion of curriculum changes, but what there is, seems to be largely focused on competencies or skills, rather than new content. The competency discussion is very important, ostensibly future oriented, but much of it is loosely founded and imprecise (and not new, which is not a problem, of course). • If the inertial constraints are not recognized and addressed, the change efforts, there is, will not be sustained or will become unbearable difficult to carry out. • In a curious way the future is only very marginally on the agenda (even though the term “future” is well represented) and a fair amount of 21st century competencies. • Some of the constraints have operated to marginalize or eradicate some crucial components of curricular development. • There is something very important missing from the current discourse. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

24. So what is the problem? There are massive and exciting, immensely important changes happening all around us, but for some strange reason they are not on the central educational agenda. Can or should this be addressed? What would be the most useful perspective to use when discussing the issue? I understand some of the reasons, but does that help? Would the book I might write about the future and education explain how the system of education is unable to adapt what it does, to changing times - which would be necessary for it to do, in order to foster in a proactive manner, an equitable and a dynamic society? Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

25. Theoretical framework(s) • Why? • To understand, why something crucial? is practically non-existent • To be able to push forward, without loosing sight of the fundamental principles of good education • The Change literature – largely atheoretical • Neo-institutionalism? Education is an institution or institutions • Cultural historical activity theory? What I am discussing seems to lend itself well to the tools of the theory. Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016

26. Thank you Jón Torfi Jónasson The future, education and the inertia to change NERA Helsinki March 2016