IIt’s Saturday, April 18, 2009 — a beautiful Spring day, probably the first day we’ll hit 70 degrees this year. I’m at the Penn State conference center with about 450 others who have dedicated the day to thinking together about teaching and learning. (That makes me proud of Penn State!)
David Wiley, from BYU (one of the leading advocates for “Learning Objects” and an all-around great guy) was our keynote speaker. David opened the day by proposing that education’s monopoly is endangered by others doing what we do, better, cheaper, and more conveniently. He cited good examples, and proposed that we (formal education) look weaker and weaker each day, as those outside move forward and we do what we have been doing. He cited certifications by the likes of Intel and Cisco as examples, which compete well with a BA in Computer Science and he cited a course he offered in which he invited others from around the world to participate in a course, using blogs and Wikis. About 60 “outsiders” participated, enriching the course, and at the end some of the outsiders who had completed all of the assignments asked for some recognition. He offered them a certificate to acknowledge their efforts, and they accepted. Then, The Chronicle of Higher Education found out about it and wrote an article on it… “When Professors Print Their Own Diplomas, Who Needs Universities?” Interesting.
Dr. Wiley forecasts “disaggregation,” in which the pieces of what we currently do pull apart. The content, much of which is now offered openly (see the MIT Open Courseware project, for example) might be one component. A second component would be assessment of student learning, and places like Western Governor’s University (which offers no courses, only assessments) stand ready to provide the assessments and give grades and credits once students demonstrate proficiency. Why would the content and assessment need to come from the same place?
David encouraged us to engage in policy change, proposing that if we do not, student learning may suffer and/or the students may turn to a new set of markets to get what they need, and proposed that our employment may be in danger.
As a good keynote session should, his talk made me wonder…
Will Penn State understand that its primary role is no longer the delivery of content, and see the primacy of assessing what students know and can do, and certifying that they have mastered content and higher-order skills? Will we understand the importance of creating connected learning communities that support students and the learning process?
Is it time for Penn State to dust off and enhance its policies on “Credit by Examination” and “Credit by Portfolio Assessment?” I think so! Do we care WHAT students know? I think so. Do we care WHETHER they can perform? Yep. Do we care WHERE they got the knowledge and skills? Nope.