In the Education Debate of the 21st century - Size does matter

In the Educational Debate of the 21 –st Century; Size Does Count.
“ . . . the world will be short 18 million primary school teachers in nine years . . . and in low-income countries . . . serious teacher shortages (have culminated in) unqualified people filling teacher s’ positions, with a decline in the quality of education. The best-qualified teachers go into private education, where resources are expanding as public resources decline. Or they go abroad.” (1)
Fred van Leeuwen – General Secretary, Education International

Data provided by the Digest of Educational Statistics, highlighted Andrews, has revealed that the United States has over 3.5 million K-12 teachers and that by 2014 that number will jump by a further 400, 000. (2) Consequently, within seven years there will be the need to graduate a further 400,000 students from colleges and universities to undertake the challenging role of teaching. All of this will be required to take place within an environment that stipulates a four year degree time-line. So if one extrapolates this to a level of a basic understanding of the challenge, within the next seven years the United States will need to produce at least a further 400,000 teachers against an educational back drop that requires them to be four year trained. Without doubt, that will be a tall order to fulfill. Yet if it is not, then clearly issues relating to social justice and equity, within the education system, will surface and create further challenges for government. What needs to be done to placate this situation? The answer is clearly complex; however, its genesis is reflected in a need to move away from the current model for Education which is constrained by a pedagogy hamstrung by teacher-student ratios.

Jonathan Finkelstein’s new book, Learning in Real Time Synchronous Teaching and Learning Online, is a very detailed and highly informative work on the development and implementation of online learning in synchronous mode; in real time. Finkelstein’s work, by focusing on the online application for education has provided a vehicle by which the above question, relating to teacher-student ratios, can be explored further. This exploration can be undertaken by examining three aspects of Finkelstein’s book; first a quote by Bert Kimura, second the use of tools in helping the instructor or teacher to interact with their students, and finally an example of the implantation of technology within a college setting.

One of the interesting quotes that Finkelstein outlined was of Bert Kimura, who expressed the view that,

No matter what technology we employ, it is still the human experience that is most important. Students learn from teachers, their peers and knowledge experts. No one learns from a computer. (3)

Currently, one of the major developments in Australia is a push by the Federal Government to turn data in to knowledge. This ICT focus has culminated in a least five Australia Universities looking at ways in which data can be obtained from technology so that that data can then lead to knowledge acquisition. An example of this would be traffic lights whereby, the lights are connected in series, however, it is possible for these lights to work independently so that they are capable of functioning either as a group or individually in controlling the flow of traffic. In this way the technology is designed to think for itself so that there is minimal human intervention. Simply put each traffic light is capable of turning data rapidly in to knowledge so that the traffic’s flow can be controlled without constant human intervention. While traffic lights and students are clearly two very different examples the application of the concept does shed some light on the use of technology within a 21-st century environment.

Online Learning has the capacity to help address the long standing issues that are associated with isolation. Its use in delivering content to rural and remote communities or regions has some very clear attributes when juxtaposed to the asynchronous model, a model that in some cases could have culminated in a 3 to 4 week time delay. Again, the assistance that Online Learning can facilitate through the extension of learning via the use of collaborative communities is also highlighted by Finkelstein’s work. Unfortunately though, for Online Learning, those attributes are a reflection of the use of technology within an Educational environment which stills clings to a 19-th century view of education; in very simple terms - Online Learning fails to turn extremely useful data in to knowledge, rapidly.
Kimura’s comment, as articulated by Finkelstein, reflects a viewpoint that places an emphasis on the human experience, which is no different from that of the opinion expressed by, for example, Ben Shneiderman for Maryland University. Human experience is necessary to ensure that the application of technology is developed in such a manner so that human qualities and not computer technologies are paramount. However, the issue rests not in the application of technology but rather its development within a 21-st century model. A world devoid of human emotions would indeed to a sad and sorry environment, yet if as educators we continue to develop our application of technology with a view to maintaining human intervention at the expense of technology then we will run the risk of alienating our students. Without a doubt students do learn from their teachers, peers and knowledge experts but the same learning process can be facilitated via ICT’s whereby, their teachers, peers and knowledge experts can augment a student’s learning to allow for a greater degree of flexibility associated with knowledge and skill acquisition.
In a 19-th Educational paradigm no one learned from computers, however, in a 21-st century Educational paradigm people will need to learn from computers and that is where the challenge exists for the educators and policy makers of today. To continue to maintain a dependence on an Educational process which still views the teacher as the center of learning curtails the advancement of students living in the 21-st century and beyond. This is because the current organizational model for schools, which reflects a philosophy developed around a 19-th century Industrial Model, is unable to respond to the prevailing social and economic conditions underpinning the Knowledge Age of the 21-st century. (4) Consequently, the relevance of contemporary educational models, that are based on the Industrial Age are open for review and further examination. Unlike the Industrial Age, the Knowledge Age will need to incorporate the rapid advancement of technology and the development of technological software to support the learning and teaching of students in a Post-Modern Age focusing on understanding and the creation of solutions as opposed to simply retention based learning. Hence, a new paradigm will need to be developed that will require schools to direct their focus on the Knowledge Age. Therefore, students will be required to negotiate contemporary learning with a different array of skills then acquired from the Industrial Model and in order for this to occur the curriculum of the future will have a wide spread adoption of technology. (5)
The restructuring required to facilitate this application of the curriculum will necessitate deep and profound changes in the way in schools function and therefore, in how they are organized. (6) The greatest limitation placed on educational organizational structures, without doubt, must to the antiquated model that focuses on the number of students per teacher; student-teacher ratios. Pappano’s article, The Incredibles, (7) is a clear example of the failure of this model to adequately meet the needs of students in the 21 – st century. Pappano cited the work of Dr Peter Watt, of Andover, who could only admit 16 students in to his 580 Physics class. Watt’s class has become very popular and as such limitations had to be placed on the number of students enrolling in his course. Hence, selection in to Watt’s class was based on the Advanced Placement Test (APT) score. Therefore, due the enthusiasm of the students and no doubt their teacher, Watt, because of the restrictions placed on him via the current model, can only admit students with an APT score of 6 in to his course.
No one would disagree that those students with an APT score of 5 would also be capable of undertaking the course work. Their capacity to engage and learn from someone like Watt’s cannot occur not because they are in capable of undertaking the work but rather by an in ability of the current model to meet their educational needs. The question is very simple; How many students, APT 5, who could have easily undertaken the work failed to do so because of the restrictions placed on both them and Watt? And more to the point; What advancements has society lost because of this?
If we begin to focus too much on the Grade Point Averages, Advance Placement Tests, Mandatory Standardized Testing and IQ testing education begins to fall under the spell of reducing human talent, as outlined by Kling (8), to a one-dimensional measurement, when in fact human talent is the compilation of a number of processes that are reflected in standards which in the end are expressed in outcomes. Those outcomes are currently being curtailed via the application of technology within classrooms around the world. And the reason for this is because we as educators still insist on using technology within the framework of a 19-th century model for education. It is this model which restricts the use of computers and does not allow students, facilitated by their teachers, to learn from them.
Computers when applied within the 21-st century context should be integrated within the education process to allow students, large numbers, to be given access to knowledge and that this process needs to be facilitated by the teacher. This teacher facilitation would occur through a data rich educational process, assisted by technology whereby, the education of hundreds of students would take place without the limitations associated with student, teacher ratios. How could this be achieved? The answer to this question is located in the second part of the examination of Finkelstein’s book; the use of tools in helping the instructor or teacher to interact with their students.
In Chapter 6, Real-Time Online Learning Activities, Finkelstein focused on the example of the Solo Fishbowl whereby,
. . . learners take on an independent task and demonstrate their knowledge or creativity or practice a new skill. This is done in the immediate company of other learners and with an instructor nearby for reinforcement or assistance. (9)
In this example, Finkelstein showed how students using an interactive whiteboard were able to plot and graph points. The beauty of this was that each student’s work could be displayed on the whiteboard for all to see and therefore,
While the students are working, the instructor peruses the student work in progress and identifies examples worthy of sharing with the entire class. The facilitator then ends the exercise, brings everyone to one particular screen, highlights one of the learner responses, and asks the corresponding student to elaborate on her work. The instructor offers feedback or asks other students to comment. Other contributions are then showed as appropriate. (10)
There are two aspects that need to be addressed here to ensure that a very clear representation of the task at hand is highlighted. First, the technology that is required to undertake such a task is indeed complex and worthy of notice. Second, while this may be the case the application of that technology, while clearly advanced, fails to address the needs of the 21 – st century. Online Learning within its context has helped to change the lives of thousands of students but yet that change is still constrained by the model under which it operates. By continuing to place an emphasis on a teacher centered approach to education we run the risk of creating a technology that controls us instead of us controlling the technology. For all of Finkelstein’s great concepts, with respect the use of technology, he stills must conform to the student teacher ratio model.
Time and its application are the main contributors to the down fall of the current model for education. Students today are evolving in a world that is reflected in the ‘I want now society’ they are not interested in what will happen they are only concerned about how soon it will happen. Any online application of technology does have a tremendous impact on the capacity to deliver content and skills in real time over vast distances, yet does it have the ability to deal with the challenges facing Watt? Clearly the answer is no. However, online learning highlights three aspects which are seminal to the application of technology within a 21-st century framework. It is from those three areas that knowledge and the undertaking to apply that knowledge can be explored.
First, that technology can be used by individuals to learn from and that this learning can be facilitated by an instructor or teacher. This is very important because without the capacity for ICT’s to impact on our lives, in this way, the use of technology would be seen as superfluous. People are capable of learning with the assistant of computers as long as that learning is facilitated by either an instructor or educator. Second, individuals are capable of interacting within a cyber community whereby, knowledge and skills can be shared and most importantly developed beyond what they were. In this way it is evident that technology, which incorporates the collective views of individuals, can be a very powerful tool in helping to establish an expansiveness of that technology throughout society. Finally, instructors or teachers can via technology facilitate the learning of students by acquiring data on them and then turning that data in to knowledge.
The application of technology within this framework falls within the boundaries of the 21-st century but only on the periphery. While technology, in this example, is used in the data to knowledge approach unfortunately that approach requires the instructor or teacher to gather the data and view it individually. This process is very time consuming, labor intensive and of course dependent upon the number of students that the instructor or teacher are required to teach. Hence, while the use of Online Learning clearly applies the data to knowledge focus it does so from a very limited and antiquated perspective. Instructors or teachers need to be able to view data and have that data turned in to knowledge not via a model that is restricted by numbers but rather expanded by the very technology that is being used and accessed by both the facilitator and the student.
That knowledge should be both quantitative and qualitative and used by the facilitator to expand on the cognitive skills of students on an individual or collective basis. In this way knowledge can become more flexible, interwoven or independent within an environment which does not restrict learning due to the number of seat allocations within a classroom. By focusing on a data to knowledge philosophy, surrounded by the facilitation of learning, via computers, teachers and instructors can undertake to engage a large numbers of students in synchronous mode. This would be developed through the use of templates designed to capture and display data, in various formats, so the teacher or instructor could focus their attention on whole groups or individuals numbered in their 100’s.
Clearly, this application is not about restricting the use of technology but rather accepting that technology has the capacity to gather, synthesize and analyze data rapidly and then to display that data, with the same rapidness, within the format desired by the teacher or instructor. It is then up to the instructor or teacher to interpret that data and then apply their knowledge and skill to facilitate the learning of each student. This process is not about taking jobs from teachers rather it is about expanding the capacity of technology to help elevate the challenges facing teachers today. It is here that the third reference point will be addressed; the implantation of technology within a college setting.
Finkelstein outlined the example of where a group of instructors, in 1999, had been told that a live virtual classroom platform had been purchased and that they had heard through the grape vine that this would culminate in automation and consequently, their dismal. (11) However, to their dismay the computer system did not make them redundant instead it augmented their importance. In fact to quote Finkelstein it allowed them to, ‘. . . share their passion for their respective subject areas with learners in remote locations who otherwise would not have had convenient access to them and their experiences. . . ‘. (12) What would Watt and his students say? Those students in the APT 5 area who have the capacity to learn but cannot be taught by Watt because of limitations placed on the teacher by student, teacher ratios? They would say that it is unfair and inequitable and they would be right!
The time for when a computer can replace a teacher or instructor is well off in the distance future, however, when that time does arrive, and it will, we should never loose sight of the fact that it is us who are in control and not the technology. Therefore, even if teachers are replaced by automation they will still exist in another form or capacity. That is the nature of the time in which we are living in and this is clearly reflected in the skills and attributes that are required by students to function in the 21-st century and beyond. Change is inevitable and a fact of life as we move through the developmental processes which are impacting on us now in the 21-st century no doubt many people would prefer not to undergo change, because change is a very stressful thing. Yet, that same concern was probably highlighted when our fore fathers emerged from the cottage industry model and were forced in to the industrial revolution and now for our generation on in to the information age. If we do not embrace this change and attempt to learn from the mistakes of our ancestors we are bound to continue to repeat history, a history full of both positives and negatives. Unfortunately, for us the gap between those gleaning the positives and those left with the negatives is widening daily on a global scale.
How will developed countries like South Korea and Taiwan, for example, meet the challenge of educating their populations when teachers are forced to teach class sizes of 60 or more? How will the developing countries like China, India and Indonesia, which represent half of the world’s population, engage enough teachers to simply teach English when countries like the US alone, will require a further 400,000 teachers within the next seven years? The only way that this can be achieved is via the use of technology so that teachers and instructors can engage their students, by facilitating their learning, through a greater dependence on a data to knowledge application. In the 21-st century when it comes to the education debate size will matter because as an ever increasing number of individuals scramble to learn more there will be less and less people who are adequately skilled to address that need. If we continue on the path that we are now following surely, based on a pragmatic view, what we are doing is unsustainable and must change.





















1. Australian Educator, Autumn 2007, Issue 53, pages 30-31.
2. Andrews, H.A., 2006, Awards and Recognition for Exceptional Teachers K-12 Community College Programs in the U.S.A., Canada and Other Countries, First Edition, Matilda Press, Ottawa, Illinois. page 4.
3. Finkelstein, J., 2006, Learning in Real Time Synchronous Teaching and Learning Online, Jossey-Bass, U.S.A. page 65.
4. Leigh, G. 2000, Key Markers in Victoria's information technology journey into the knowledge age. Australian Educational Computing, 15 (1), 7 – 12.
5. ibid. Leigh’s work also focused on development of articles written by both Spender (1998) and Ducker (1995)
6. Dooley, K., 1999, Towards a Holistic Model for the Diffusion of Educational Technologies: An Integrated Review of Educational Innovation Studies. Educational Technology & Society, 2 (4)
7. Pappano, L., The Incredibles, The Sunday New York Times, January 7th , 2007.
8. Kling, A., For Whom the Bell Curves, America’s Educational Dilemma, TSC Daily, 22nd January, 2007.
9. Finkelstein, J., 2006, Learning in Real Time Synchronous Teaching and Learning Online, Jossey-Bass, U.S.A. page 108.
10. ibid, page 109.
11. ibid, page 66.
12. ibid, page 66.