![\"\"](\"http:\/\/cte-blog.uwaterloo.ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2010\/08\/rgn_wikipedia_wideweb__470x45822.jpg\")
<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
For a few years now, I have been following Joe Bower<\/a> on Twitter. He is a great thinker and advocate for responsible and positive change in education. He is a thoughtful blogger, and he got me thinking of my discussions with many during the last Cohort 21 F2F session about personalization of learning. Amongst others, Derek<\/a> was emphasizing how different disciplines would be able to personalize in different ways, and Ruth<\/a>\u00a0was questioning where the motivation comes from, and how could you set up the classroom to facilitate personalization. It has been really interesting to see how their understandings have progressed and been implemented through the action plans.<\/p>\n But it got me thinking about the journey that has lead us to personalization, and Joe\u2019s last blog post about it inspired me to question where personalization might be headed. So I\u2019m putting on my Marshall McLuhan hat and will try to be skeptical of personalization by posing some questions.<\/p>\n First, what does personalizing learning enhance?<\/strong> Second, is what could pesonalizing learning make obselete?<\/strong> Those who suggest teachers should be replaced by a technology that can simply<\/p>\n grade more efficiently<\/p><\/blockquote>\n are\u00a0at best\u00a0<\/i>revealing their primitive understanding for what education is all about and\u00a0at worst<\/i>\u00a0are exposing their desire to bust teachers\u2019 unions and destroy public education. These people play politics and profit from education at our children\u2019s peril.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n Thirdly, is what could personalizing cause us to retrieve?<\/strong> Finally, what can personalization of learning reverse into<\/strong> (that is what happens when there is too much of it?) So, as we move forward in education, I think that it is important to question personalization in light of what makes education great: the relationships, the construction of knowledge, and most importantly the connections students make between the learning and their own lives.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" For a few years now, I have been following Joe Bower on Twitter. He is a great thinker and advocate for responsible and positive change in education. He is a thoughtful blogger, and he got me thinking of my discussions with many during the last Cohort 21 F2F session about personalization of learning. Amongst others,…
\n\u2013Well, it allows the student to take greater control over their own learning, and challenge (or not!) themselves as they see fit. It also allows students to work at their own pace, and receive the guidance, support and resources as they need them. This approach could be very positive.<\/p>\n
\n\u2014 Joe Bower captures this nicely when he writes:<\/p>\n
\n\u2014 I think that there is a risk of personalizing too much so that the classroom experience is too fractured, and taken to the extreme, the school culture is too fractured that we lose the sense of belonging, of being part of a community. This is something that I value and am working to maintain in my own school. I view myself as a social-constructivist educator, and as such I\u00a0view knowledge as a byproduct not of individual minds but of communal relationships (See this article<\/a>).<\/p>\n
\n\u2014 For this answer I go back to Joe Bower\u2019s blog, and would ask that you view this youtube of BF Skinner and personalized learning:\u00a0http:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=jTH3ob1IRFo<\/a><\/p>\n
Read more