Going Forward

One pseudo advantage for education is that competition is controlled. To start a school or bring innovation to an existing school has been controlled by the system up to the politicians. Customers just cannot afford to go elsewhere. Restrictions to those employed as teachers has been tightened to certified teachers which is controlled within the same system in the name of standards. Every so often there is a push for more controlled restrictions limiting who is employed and what can be done by schools. Recently this has changed a little with the development of academies and free schools which allow other methods of management, which may give flexibility to how they are run. Many of the barriers and restrictions may now be challenged. When innovation is allowed and produces results then change may be divested throughout the industry. Universities may have the first problem though as fixed 3 years+ degrees only fit so many people. There are many jobs that value experience as included in apprenticeships that means 3 years is too long to not gain experience. Other industries have dynamic pressures that cannot allow people to become out of date. Many degrees are out of date by the time of completion.

Customers will look for better alternatives and make demands on the existing system which may now be met. Flexibility for individuals rather than herd teaching will become a major force for change. Others may also fill gaps. In many industries the cherry picking profitable areas has occurred, post 16 years education is most vulnerable.

Technology already has the ability to individualise some areas of education. Online and other CBT courses with video lectures (can be re-watched where lecturers cannot repeat anywhere near as much). There are also packages that include questions where some will not let you move to the next level till you have got 10 questions in a row right. This allows those with pre-existing knowledge or who pick up quick to progress faster. Those who are struggling can be seen (via IT system) and flagged where assistance can be given. Another factor is that computer based system can include analysis of problems and allow continuous improvement that teachers cannot do at present. Reducing the sticking points that learners commonly experience and also analysing the solutions to the sticking points and improving progress.

This model already exists in the Khan Academy with a lot of academic subjects. Other online teaching by teachers is already available. Home schooling can provide much that is done in a school in less time and less stress for the learner. Other organisations may fill the other functions not covered by ICT. Only the official qualification needs to be set (some areas have this already e.g.s. IT: Microsoft, Cisco courses etc.).

Restricting teachers to those who are academic for many subjects is an ill-judged limit. I have met people teaching without any qualifications and some number amongst the best at teaching. I have been taught much by people who do not share the same language and even people who make up their own (dumpf is not a regular (Oxbridge do not teach it anyway) word but made the point perfectly). When teachers have small groups rather than a crowd of 20, 30+, then many elements are easier to control. Also teachers can stick to their specialisms and strengths, rather than having discipline and group learning and institutional tasks being the major tasks or the covering of other subjects.

Also being able to proceed at an individuals own pace and not at a groups pace will be advantageous for most learners at different times. Some learners can progress much faster than the rest of the group can. Others need to follow their strengths or follow tangents of interest. Some standard assessments that meet real applied levels both for the real world but also for academia. These can be taken when a learner is ready not at a fixed time and age. As long as a learner has enough proof of ability when the proof is needed, the time and order can be more flexible. With more flexibility, when a learner has achieved in their strength they will have more skills and confidence when they attempt their weaker areas. An example maybe where a student finds languages easier and interesting they could develop these skills early on and could specialise in these and later look at important areas that they did not have clear ability or interest. Those that find languages difficult can have a go early on with no pressure and move onto their strengths, rather than wasting time with little progress. If languages are more relevant later, then with progress in their strengths, a greater understanding of themselves, learning and the world they will have a better chance to progress. To become fluent in a foreign language is best done by starting very early. Fluency though is only needed by a small portion of people where as language skills with an accent may be sufficient for the majority.

As well as computer based training (CBT), technology will follow military training with simulation training. The most obvious example are the flight simulators that cost a fraction of flying fighter jets. They increase all the time the scope of training and practice they can provide. Many areas of military training and practice now have simulator options such as vehicles, equipment but also reality simulators for soldier and officer roles and situations. This allows adaptable training for when it might not be safe or for problems that are rare can be prepared for at less cost with higher standards and more repetitions. Along with computer game development and reduced technology size and relative cost more options will appear. This will appear for teaching, practice and assessment closer to real world usage rather than class room isolation.

Much progress has already been made that will be re-purposed for education possibly outside of educational establishments in industry and commercial organisations particularly if state education system fails to progress. Cost savings are a prime motivation but hopefully a quality motivation could be encouraged.

The Underpinning of Advanced Teaching.

One of the issues of advanced teaching methods is the inability of most people to understand them. The classic problem with devices like metaphors is people forgetting they are metaphors and taking a literal interpretation then claiming falsehood (Straw-man fallacy). In the battle of uncritical thinking demonstrated in the media the expression is attacked rather than the message it is desired to deliver. The same pattern happens with models where the model is not reality but a simplified map for practical purposes. Many scientific models have allowed development before being proved incorrect or superseded with more useful models. Seeing the model as a tool for certain purposes is valid but using one tool for all things is from the hammer school; seeing all things as nails.

Within teaching you are trying to get a person(s) from not knowing to knowing or not being able to do to being able to do. Applying knowledge and skills or combining them may also be an aim. Blooms taxonomy of learning is helpful as at the early stages you work on first basic skills and knowledge then combining skills tactically, reducing the effort needed for each stage. Still the simplest method is practice, practice, practice until the brain and body performs to required levels consistently. Higher levels of skills and knowledge can still be practised, but broken down skills need to be joined together and applied. Here applying complex real world models benefits from more advanced teaching methods. Business courses use case studies, real and manufactured to show things from different perspectives. We get to situations that have no right or wrong answer or answers including multiple options. This is where bureaucratic learning fails. The description of the difference between the real world and a map where an exact map would need to be the same size as the real world (not very pocket friendly). Trying to document everything is not just a distraction but a barrier to teaching and learning. In fact advanced learning involves more guidance and answering questions rather than direct teaching. People may be doing more as they are busy but not doing more towards learning aims.

Old Indian and Chinese teachings require personal dedication from the learner. Old literature has many interpretations that need reflecting on. Much cannot be understood until this has been done. It highlights the age old problem of finding a teacher. How do you know who is a good teacher? You are too ignorant to understand. This is where the learner needs good essential knowledge and skills. There are many books covering critical thinking skills. These include logic and also many logical mistakes people make. It is sometimes amazing to read literature from thousands of years ago covering the same material. Learning the difference between real knowledge and skill and imitators is part of Plato's (+ Socrates) dialogues. Here manipulation for one’s own purposes is criticized but also so are the human biases. These skills are particularly needed for advanced development.

Miscarriages of justice have occurred where the game in courts of regaling stories to convince, turn out to be factually incorrect. Baroness Kennedy once described on a radio programme about how the battle of stories in court appealed to her. Story telling is an ancient effective method of teaching but also of persuading. The story draws a person in with vivid descriptions and emotional attraction to snare the reader or listener. They are easy to remember as they follow chronology and life patterns. Now I have come across many stories that maybe dependent on taste take you away to a different place. The major point is great stories may not be true stories. They can be used as devices for many purposes (enjoyment is a good purpose) but when truth is required and reality required. The story needs to be identified as a tool (for a purpose) or truth. Here is where maths and logic lead to critical thinking.

A great story is a great story it may be true or false or an interpretation, knowing which, comes under critical thinking getting the right category. There is literature on courts getting the maths or logic wrong. Asking and answering the wrong questions. Now this situation is as dangerous as a politician with some statistics, anything could be claimed in the hope that the audience will believe the story. A classic logical error is cherry picking choosing some of the information or data and ignoring others. The failing attempt of tobacco companies regarding passive smoking where studies that show evidence of harm (the vast majority) were ignored for the handful that showed no harm. Of course another common error is to attack something when an opponent does it but defend it when your side does it. These are errors causing misunderstanding through stupidity, ignorance and artifice.

These are real world problems that advanced teaching address. The tools need to be used to encourage advanced skills and understanding. In the same way the teacher needs to have the skills and understanding of how to use and evaluate these tools. The other method of advanced teaching can be used with beginners to create learning faster and more efficiently through advanced methods. This is rare as the teacher's boss and 'superiors' (in pay and power) will not understand and put an end to it as soon as possible. I definitely lean to Socrates description of imitators of expertise using rhetoric and power rather than actual expertise.

To be able to be an advanced teacher takes time (10,000 hours!) and an environment that allows it to be possible. Having a system proscribing basic teaching that produces bureaucratic evidence does not allow this to develop. When the learners do not know and do not respect those that may know, then progress is stymied. Gaining personal respect, and proving competence is not based on teaching but the environment’s culture. Progress in the culture of education (promotion, hassle avoidance?) is favoured not developing teaching excellence (imitation not actual). Spending many hours in non-teaching activities detracts from teaching.

Advanced Learning and Teaching to Achievement.

There are many literary devices that can be used to aid learning. Often used in pre and low literacy societies were stories often allegorical with many literary devices used within the stories. The stories were not just entertainment, that was the catch to help remember and learn. The stories held obvious and hidden messages. One suggestion is Little Red Riding Hood was a story for girls about the danger of boys. In oriental philosophies that overlap with religions, this same approach is used, in Chinese descriptions they use terse language which can have many meanings. The point is many fold one is to hide knowledge in plain sight when only special instruction or much practice can reveal. Sometimes the many possible meanings may all be part of the answer. Any one who has studied something oriental will have come across the paradoxes where you ask your teacher an either/or question and the answer is yes (to both). We sometimes forget that language is not enough for more advanced topics, where sometimes it's yes and sometimes it's no. This part of the world and life is impossible to explain to anybody who has no or insufficient experience, but words are not enough in the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) approach. A common expression is a picture paints a thousand words. So for learning advanced elements and advanced teaching; KISS bureaucracy will not work. Don't be tempted to draw pictures on official forms though, they will not understand.

Expertise always has this problem of passing on the knowledge. Modern education uses restrictive language to measure expertise and then not allow leeway. If the answer is sometimes (welcome to life!) the system breaks down or the paperwork gets complicated. So how does an experienced teacher tell an inspector, manager or politician who does not understand that they know best. When of course bureaucracy can be used as a stick to beat the expert to the ideas (or purpose) of their bosses (usually guess based). Traditionally the teaching of complicated and advanced areas was long term. Industrialisation has reduced the need for many high level craft workers with automation. They usually replaced the lower performing workers cheaply. They produce very cheaply and force the high quality workers into niches eventually encroaching into these areas and then undermining the viability of any workers. Change also leads to outdated skills and knowledge. No system can keep up.

I would put forward that mastery or at least expertise beyond most people helps a person have a place in society but also the knowledge that they can do something better than most is beneficial. To excel or become and expert requires time. The 10,000 hours rule claims that no expert has achieved top level performance in anything without 10,000 hours practice. They also have a goal in mind and focus on that goal. There is sacrifice and less compromise to and for their goal. There is trail and error as part of constant improvement (at irregular paces) and grit, the determination to get through. Succeeding with or in spite of those around them.

So advanced learning requires different approaches to a box ticking approach. A simple phrase may state a principle or concept that can be expanded exponentially creating infinite levels of detail. Other elements may be learning the feel of the balance of forces or optimising a changing situation. It is an amazing aspect of life where some very clever people can talk for hours about concepts that an uneducated practitioner just does in seconds with no high faluting explanations or even a simple one. You cannot and should not try to explain everything to the uninitiated. Practicing higher level descriptions for other experts has value. But communication cannot always be explicit. It has to be for the other to understand on the basis of their knowledge and understanding or for them to investigate and reflect to the greater meaning they do not yet have. These are all you can use for advanced elements. As artificial intelligence (AI) attempts to write code for complex (or relatively simple) problems they run out of both computer space and time to type. They have learned to imitate rather than do or explain everything. Whether it is decision making or simulating insect flight not everything is taken into account by the brain but it does the things that most often lead to success (the insect does not die out).

The Zen Koans are the classic example of terse language. One sentence from the master is given to the student and they go away and keep reflecting, questioning until a level of enlightenment (realisation of a meaning) is reached. Then the master says something like 'that could be' or 'what else?' The process goes on forever in this context leading to more and more enlightenment.

Advanced teaching can also use the method. How can you encourage learning (it happens in the student). What pictures, language or other (?) leads to learning. The teacher may try to speed up learning or give a base for lifelong learning, or tackle difficult areas. Just saying the words even if they are read off a power-point slide are not advanced!

This post is bitty but the ideas of advanced teaching and the teaching of advanced levels just don’t fit simple language and are difficult to explain. It is like the difference between a model and reality or a map and the real ground. A perfect model or map would be useless as it would be at least as big as the real world. Massively complicated models and maps of scale 1:1 are not that usable. Writing it down with completeness for the convenience of some inspectors is not worth the effort. Using metaphors or statements like Koans and student reflection and trail and error, need to be encouraged with guidance but forget the documentation as it’s for people who cannot understand.

Moving Towards Excellence (Teacher)

Progression to excellence is not only to be supported in the learners but also the staff. As in many areas a teacher after a while may well be promoted to a role with fewer teaching hours. So the most experienced do little actual teaching. Teaching to create learning is a craft that requires practice and dedication. Within the institutions many other aims take up the time of the staff. Discipline and crowd control are a big part of getting the learners to the point of learning (that has a high failure rate). Changes of curriculum and the day to day running of the organisation may mean changes to plans due to facilities, illness, other priorities and failures. There are many distractions and priorities that overwhelm teacher development in education. Teachers do not get to do 10,000 hours teaching. Class time may reach 700 hours a year but a lot of time is spent on class administration and discipline not actual teaching tasks. Close to 15 years is required to get 10,000 hours if they stay in the classroom.

A basic model is blooms taxonomy of skill. A teacher needs to go through development of many skills to get to at least the apply level. But to improve performance and raise standards they will need higher skill levels. This can only come through practice. They do practice general teaching, but as an example a science teacher may teach a topic like forces to year 7. They might do it twice in a year, perhaps for a 40 year career (at most). So that is 80 times, but this is unlikely. At the same time as teaching forces they will be teaching other topics at various levels and coping with many other aspects of work (and home) life. Compare that to myself I have taught the First Aid at Work course (now 3 days) alone over 100 times. I have also taught the refresher course a similar number of times, and one day courses and other courses as well. So I have taught CPR maybe 500 times in a lot less time. So the number of practices is much greater and the number of distractions is much fewer. This leads to higher standards, as long as the teacher works towards improvement. A school teacher cannot hope to develop themselves in their teaching of specific areas. Of course if they aim to get a promotion they will not teach any topic up to 50 times.

Another basic model is the Plan, Do, Check and Act (PDCA) which is rotated through. Obviously in first aid I have to teach and get them enough practice so on the last day the candidates can follow the action in emergency plan (DRABC etc.) to the required standard in usually three practical assessments and then to answer enough questions about the rest of the syllabus. The required standard is not advanced as it is a course for lay people. The more advanced courses in medicine have more content and higher standards. This allows for incremental practice for new learners and drill practice for more experienced first aiders. So I teach and the learner learns with the PDCA cycle of continuous improvement. Teachers can also follow the pattern of repeated cycling through checking progress and effectiveness foer themselves.

The degree courses for teaching do include school time with practice, but how can they develop teaching (the task, not the whole job) excellence. Practice, practice, practice. I would suggest a more apprentice like training. Here they would work in schools gradually increasing the tasks they perform. The essentials can be done many times rather than sat in a classroom and doing assignments. The repeated practice with a PDCA approach with mentoring and then self analysis allows improvement in the most common skills. The class sizes would have to be from smaller numbers to start and then building class sizes where learning allows (not where bureaucracy dictates). This method does not require a degree and opens up to other able people not just those that passed exams easily. Some subjects that are not academic would not need degree educated teachers but experience in sports and arts teaching and practice for instance. This incremental improvement in performance of all the basic skills and tasks of teaching would be at a good level (and recognised) before they have to deal with admin and non teaching elements. The skills and tasks can be incrementally added at appropriate times. Some trainee teachers would progress through quickly, others would have sticking points and others would find they are in the wrong job. They may still be productive for the education organisation in the mean time.

At present there is one way into school teaching through University courses all similar to each other. Some teachers are better prepared than others. But the system is saying this way is the only way and that the system will produce the best teachers. I have been in schools and seen (and been put in) the situations teachers are put in. Some leave (at all stages), some learn to survive and pass the targets, some learn to get promoted out the way! Few are in a position to perfect their art.

This approach would be backed up by day release or block theory education probably combined with learning assistants allowing progression (or not) up a scale of skills and responsibilities from learning assistants to teaching or management. Obviously not every one would want to keep adding skills to become teachers or managers. It would also allow those who want to be teachers or managers to progress with solid understanding rather than being a teacher thrown in at the deep end and then taking on extra responsibilities as expected and then management. Learning assistants share a lot of the basic skills with teachers, but teaching and managing are sufficiently different to require different training and people. To force teachers to manage or limit managers to only teachers does not work to peoples strengths and weaknesses.

An important point for teachers who do not move towards excellence in their teaching is they will be replaceable by evidence based technology sooner. Technology will not have to be better than teachers but cheaper or get results politically better for the decision makers.