New York Times continues exploration of P-TECH, asks how long students should spend in high school. Aside from the matter that what makes P-TECH so revolutionary is that it does what should have been done all along, the folks at the Times aren’t quite ready for the next step, competency-based education.
At Huffington Post, the new innovators’ dilemma… running into regulations designed for an earlier era. Perhaps the technology entrepreneurs and other leaders will pay more attention to the politicians they support in the future.
Related: next to the book, nothing will change education like digital learning. Did they have these discussions in the 1400s? Were people really saying that these new “books” are nothing more than a right-wing plot to eliminate scribes’ jobs?
Related still: the Motley Fool wonders: will publishers survive the digital revolution? As you’d expect from MF, this is mostly about stocks and investing, but here’s the money quote (as it were): ” In fact, textbook sellers, like Pearson, have an edge over new start-ups in cross-selling their digital learning services because of their long-standing relationships with their customers. Hence, it comes as no surprise that Pearson now derives about a third of its revenues from digital learning services.”
Group against common core suggests passing out literature in kids’ candy bags. I’ve been in grassroots advocacy and lobbying for 20 years now and have yet to see a case where handing out paper to kids was an effective tool. Candidates have had more success with this, passing out candy with their name on it. It’s not quite the same thing.
Bonus Links: don’t know if it is the weather or the Bengals’ last-second, walk-off safety, but it was a gloomy enough morning to kick the month off with this number. I suppose my friends in South Beach might start the day off with a different tune. (PS, this is the only song I’ve ever tried to karaoke.)