[Gardner Campbell & Jim Groom, OpenEd09]
Day Two of Open Education 2009 and I can honestly say I’ve yet to see a presentation that wasn’t at least as good as the best presentations I’ve seen at any conference anywhere.
Gardner Campbell’s “No Digital Facelifts: Thinking the Unthinkable About Open Educational Experiences” is one of those that had me repeatedly saying to myself “every teacher needs to watch this.” In true Gardner-esque fashion—the model I aspire to—he weaved together the invention of the alphabet, Brazil, Shakespeare and the music of the spheres, and much else besides into a (there’s no other word for it) compelling whole.
I came to this conference seeking hope… hope that despite the brokenness of our educational institutions, good teachers can elevate the profession; hope that despite the toll exacted by the daily grind of working within those institutions, excellence can be had. Gardner’s presentation restored some of that hope… his excellent (and funny) analogy to being given a bag of gold is what I need to keep in mind when I return to the other part of my real world.
My question is, how to maintain that hope? Gardner puts forth a premise that we should be teaching using narrative, curation and sharing. We all like to talk about the regressive factors that hold us back: institutional lethargy, recalcitrant educators, simple fear, technological complexity. But worse still is that as much as those factors exist, progress towards this vision of education is impeded by people at the front. Creating narrative is thwarted by concerns about community building and identity. Curation is pushed back by far-leaning constructivists and discovery-based educational theory promoting leading from behind. Efforts at sharing crumble and dissolve beneath the weight of arguments over licensing and which space should be used. Despite the clarity of these three simple concepts—narrate, curate, share—the world feels exceedingly dark.
Gardner used the example of a quotation that feels like it was written yesterday but was actually the words of Marshall McLuhan from over 40 years ago. I’ve used similar examples from the work of Baltasar Gracian (300 years ago) and Michel Montaigne (500 years ago). The wise words grab our attention and confirm our intuitions and desires… but they cut sharply the other way. Go back 40 years, 300 years, 500 years—go back to Plato and Haraklitus—and the relevance of their words also demonstrates clearly how little progress has been made. How do we keep the faith if the answer to that lack of progress is wait, wait, wait, it’s coming, but not yet?
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
We encourage each other with tales of our small victories. We reflect on the individuals that have benefited from our efforts rather than the whole which seemingly does not. We retain the child’s optimistic, wonder-filled view of life and the world. We look at the problems at hand and deal with them, rather than the ones that await us. We do not just eat, sleep and work. We also play, learn and care. In essence, we run the course and keep the faith.
Perhaps the only way change has ever happened: one person at a time. It may be that the role(s) we have adopted inhibit us from enacting dreams of better teaching. I know that’s becoming more and more apparent in my case, as administration continually says, “That’s not your role”.
Perhaps it’s more realistic for folks like Gardner, as a faculty member has the almighty academic freedom; if one can’t get the service and support one needs on campus, who’s to stop a faculty member from adventuring on their own?
One of the phrases Gardner used throughout the talk that resonated most with me is “amplify our selves”. A teacher’s usefulness is in part to guide or assist or empower students to amplify themselves, and a teacher’s grandeur is that s/he has the chance to do so for at least a dozen students during the course of a semester– ~45 hours. Aside from teaching, it seems the best way to have a real piece of this action is through faculty training or centers for excellence. As much as I enjoy my job its one of strict timelines and production-line assemblage; I envy Marc’s job because it has few, if any, timelines and allows for deeper, constructive relationships with faculty at their speed, implementing slow change, but significant change.