Singapore – a model for C21 schooling? (but not how you think!)

(A summary and discussion of some key ideas from Learning from Singapore – The Power of Paradoxes by Pak Tee Ng) 

Singapore Education 

Think of the Singapore Education system. Typically, you will have in your mind a picture of extremely high performing students, driven by tiger parents to succeed at the highest level, especially in maths. You’ll believe that it has a system that is totally focused achieving the outcomes that will ensure that it remains at the top of the PISA and TIMSS table. Well you’d be wrong (that was so 2000s!). Singapore is already ahead of the game – the education department moved on from PISA targets and have put in place a curriculum and approach that they believe will produce a workforce with C21 skills of communication, collaboration, creativity and critical thinking. In so doing it provides a model which all in education which is worthy of discussion, debate and, arguably, adoption. 

The key to understanding the Singapore education system is to understand the nature of Singapore itself. It is a young nation – only 54 years old – it is ambitious and aspirational. Its economy was built on a few basic tenets: fiscal discipline, good governance, rule of law, and a widely accepted social contract. It is meritocratic – one’s position with Singaporean society is determined fundamentally by one’s relative success or otherwise in school examinations aged 9, 11, 16 and 18. Education has always been the key to upward social mobility. The inevitable consequence of these factors is that education is one of the central political issues in Singapore. The Government is invested in education because the nation’s prosperity depends on it; and parents are invested in education because their child’s future prospects will be determined by it. It should also be noted that the Education sector is relatively small (370 schools and 500,000 students) so it is possible to have greater centralised control than in a country such as the UK. 

The stereotypical view of Singapore as having a rote-learning exam-focused curriculum was borne out of the alignment of Government and parents both wanting to drive up academic standards. This played itself out in the Primary School Leaving Examination (PLSE at age 11) and in public examination results at GCE O-level (at age 16), GCE A-level (at 18) and in University degrees. Hothousing, tutoring became the norm. The consequence was that Singapore shot to the top of the PISA rankings. 

Singapore’s lack of any natural resources means that developing intellectual capital is the key to the country’s competitive advantage in the global marketplace (p.23) – education is one of the key drivers of the economy. In this context it is understandable that the Singapore Government sees education as an investment rather than as an expenditure (p.50). They realised that the skills that bring success in PISA will not necessarily ensure the success of Singapore as a nation in the changing economy of the C21. 

As a consequence, over the past fifteen or so years there has developed a divergence between what parents want (traditional examination success) and what the Government wants (C21 skills for the workplace). Singapore, which is held up as the envy of the world for its PISA and other rankings, has already moved on from the rote-learning, that established its global reputation. As Pak Tee Ng argues,

“International rankings are not what we are aiming for. We are more interested in the actual education of our children and young people.” (p.5) 

“Singapore has to kick away the ladder that got it to where it is now, while still standing on that ladder. It has to abandon its obsession with learning for examinations. It is now focusing on learning for life, embracing holistic education, and developing young people to think critically and creatively. Singapore is now jumping to another ladder that can take the country further.” (p.41) 

“Simply acing examinations does not equip one for life!” (p.43) 

Holistic Education: Quality not examination success 

Singapore’s education is now focused on a holistic education that prepares students for the future economies and society. 

Singapore’s revised educational framework (p.44) is based on a set of core values: respect, responsibility, integrity, care, resilience, and harmony. It emphasises the following social and emotional competences: self-awareness, self-management; social awareness, relationship management, and responsible decision-making. It seeks to develop C21 skills to live in a globalised world: 

• Civic literacy, global awareness and cross-cultural skills; 
• Critical and inventive thinking; 
• Communication, collaboration and information skills. 

Meritocracy & Equity: Stretch & Support 

The challenges that Singapore faces on a national level are the same ones faced by every school: How does one provide a model of schooling that strikes a balance between stretching the brightest and bringing on those who need additional support? 

“As a very small country Singapore, has a limited pool of human resources and cannot afford to leave children behind. On the other hand, if policies are designed to achieve equality among children, the students who an ‘fly’ may be held back, and Singapore could be the poorer because of this. Therefore, in the paradox of compassionate meritocracy, Singapore has to leave no child behind without holding back the children in front.” (p.64) 

The result is an approach which “does not set an artificial glass ceiling for the sake of equity”, it encourages those who can ‘fly’ to do so; it provides pathways for the middle; and it ensures that there are direct interventions so that no child is left behind. 

“Such an approach does not promise an equalisation of outcomes, or even pretend to do so.” (p.64) 

Teach Less, Learn More (TLLM) 

One of the most interesting and challenging aspects of Singaporean education is the shift from a teacher-centric to a learner-centric pedagogy for the classroom. This is encapsulated in the assertion that “if teachers teach less but teach better, then students will be able to learn better and be more motivated in their learning” or, put more simply, “teach less, learn more” (p.92). The analogy here is that there needs to be time to digest food (learning) before having the next meal. This is what is behind Singapore Maths which builds on the development theory that students need to understand concrete examples first before they can fully grasp abstract concepts (p.107).
The TLLM approach emphasises quality over quantity, and students are “less dependent on rote learning, repetitive tests and standardised instruction” (p.93). This also created space within the curriculum for schools to introduce their own programmes and to promote intellectual curiosity and a collective enterprising spirit among students.

“It envisaged that teachers and students will be involved in a wide range of learning activities such as brainstorming, problem-solving, undertaking real world tasks and peer teaching using various pedagogical modes such as collaborative learning, problem-based learning and project work.” (p.94)

This approach raised the hardy perennial debate about how to strike the right balance in the curriculum between subject knowledge and these new skills, most notably in the context of a high-stakes examination system. Here Pak Tee Ng provides another useful analogy: 

“Two Chess Grandmasters compete in the finals of the chess competition. Both have studied all the opening moves. Both have studied all the end games. Both have many years of experience. In a way both have acquired all the conventional knowledge about chess. So who wins? The one who is least trapped by conventional knowledge and can make the unexpected and devastating move wins! Therefore, there are two parts to the challenge of TLLM. Students have to learn the conventional knowledge solidly. Then they have to learn not to be trapped by conventional knowledge so that they may be adaptable and innovative.” (p.96) 

This resulted in a new paradigm for schooling where teachers are no longer the (spoon-feeding) provider of information and solutions, rather they are the designers of learning opportunities. Here, teachers are guides and mentors and students need to take ownership of their learning journey. 

TLLM is a vehicle for ‘quality education’ which might be defined as “one that emphasises holistic development, equips students with the knowledge and skills for the future, inculcates students with the right values and imbues students with a positive learning attitude.” (p.103) 

Relationships are at the heart of quality education: “Quality education is quality teaching, quality learning and quality relationship between the teacher and student.” (p.104) 

Squaring the Circle: ‘Every School, a Good School’: ‘Every Parent, a Supportive Parent’ 

‘Parents are important because you are your child’s first and most important teacher in life’ (Minister Heng Swee Keat p.159) 

It has not been easy for the Singapore Government to change the wider (parental) culture which sees additional tuition and rote-learning as the path to examination (and therefore career) success. Indeed, the MOE’s decision to abolish ranking schools on their academic results in 2012 was driven in part by a desire to stop motivated parents gravitating towards the top-performing schools. Instead schools are recognised for best practice in Teaching and Learning, Student All-round Development, Staff Development and Well-being, Character and Citizenship Education, and Partnerships (p.121).
Yet Singapore has a long way to go to change the Kiasu (lit. ‘fear of losing’) parenting approach which drives them to pay for additional tutoring and to put extreme pressure on their children.

A few thoughts 

Singapore – a model? 

Educational debates about Singapore over the past ten years have focused on whether or not it is possible “to scale up” Singapore’s educational success to larger, more traditional and more complex educational systems in Europe and North America. Most conclude that it is not possible. However, as a school leader I am taken by the idea that if it can work at a small nation level, it is clearly possible “to scale down” its leading features to a Schools’ Group or a school. Whereas most people look at Singapore and say ‘That won’t work in the UK for the following reasons’, I find myself asking, ‘Shouldn’t we be doing this at Kellett?’ 

Once the problem of scale is removed, we are left with a number of important educational debates which the Singapore journey can illuminate: 

• Curriculum: What is the right balance between learning knowledge and skills? 
• Assessment: Is there a place for high-stakes assessment in C21? 
• Differentiation: Within finite resources, how do we provide for those who need support without holding back the most able? 
• Quality and Accountability: What makes a good school? What should be the basis for school inspection/ evaluation? Should schools be graded/ appear in League Tables? 
• School and Home: What is the right relationship between school, home and the child/student? How do educationalists carry parents with them when arguing for a different educational journey to the one which parents took 30 years ago? 
• Teachers: What makes a great teacher? 
• Professional Development: How do we foster a professional learning community? 

Formative Education Systems and International Testing 

The UAE is at a formative stage in its educational journey and has had the stated aim of being in the top 20 countries for PISA by 2018 and the top 15 for TIMSS by 2019. This is totally antagonistic to the approach being advocated by Pak Tee Ng. However, it is interesting to reflect whether success in international tests is a distraction, or a necessary staging post that then allows countries to move to the more sophisticated aims to which Singapore now aspires.

The Machines are coming: Automated Systems and AI in Education

A Presentation given at the COBIS Annual Conference in London on Monday 13th May 2019



The presentation looks at:

1. How automated systems can handle data; 
2. How automated systems can provide live data to parents bringing an end to school reports 
3. AI in Education 
4. Will AI ever replace teachers?

The Rise of AI

A keynote presentation given at the ISBA Digital Strategy and Cybersecurity Conference at the BMA in London on Wednesday 27th March 2019.
The presentation looks at the following areas:

1. What is AI?
2. The Ethics of Ai.
3. AI, Education and the #FutureSchool
4. The threat of AI to Fee-paying Education

Transforming Learning in a Millennial World

My keynote presentation at the BSME Annual Conference held at Yas Marina Conference Centre in Abu Dhabi on Wednesday 20th March 2019

Growth Headset? The Use of VR and AR in Schools

The lift doors closed, and I ascended to the 45th floor. When they opened again, it was not to the ubiquitous corridor, but to a plank extending out from the building. It was a test: did I have the nerve to walk out there? I was experiencing acute anxiety and the inevitable vertigo associated with looking down from a skyscraper. I froze – I could not leave the safety of the lift. I was simply terrified. I had failed. So I removed the headset.

The Power of VR

It was at this point that I realised the power of Virtual Reality. Part of my brain knew that I was in the safety of a classroom room in the Sixth form block at my school and that the plank, in reality, was an expanse of carpet extending in front of me. Despite knowing that I was in no immediate danger, I was terrified. My senses had been hijacked by Virtual Reality and some primal sense of survival deep inside me had kicked in and try as I might I could not overcome it. The ‘Plank Experience’ has been part of our IB Diploma Psychology unit on fear and anxiety for a couple of years now. It is an extraordinary way of approaching the topic. It is one of many examples of how Virtual Reality is transforming the classroom experience of pupils.

Trips in VR

At a very basic level, Virtual Reality gives almost limitless scope for teachers to take pupils on trips anywhere in the world without leaving the grounds. A class can visit China and experience what it is like to walk up and down the crumbling steps of the Great Wall, they can take a stroll along Wall Street, gasp at the view from the top of the Burj Khalifa, or even dive the Great Barrier Reef. In the past six months, Year 7 went to Africa, Year 3 have been to the Pyramids, Year 4 visited the Vikings, Year 5 went to Ancient Greece and Year 1 even travelled into Space. All these ‘school trips’ are available in the classroom within a matter of minutes – a further bonus is that there’s no disruption to the curriculum, no additional paperwork, no buses to order, and the hi-vis jackets can stay in the cupboard. 

Over the past twenty years, we have seen videos, DVDs, classroom projectors, interactive whiteboards, 3D projectors and computer games recruited to improve the learning experience of pupils. So, is Virtual Reality just the latest in that long line of new technologies which teachers harnessed in the service of education? Is it just another gimmick to grab the attention of a new generation? It is understandable that teachers and school leaders are sceptical.

Research-backed Pedagogy

We know that each invention that is deployed in schools requires the development of an effective pedagogy which enables teachers to get the most out of the new technology. This, in turn, poses several important questions about the value and effectiveness of the new technology in promoting learning, understanding, empathy and in improving learning outcomes. With the luxury of hindsight, too many schools deployed new technologies without really knowing what they were doing or why they were doing it. History teaches us that effective implementation is facilitated by twin drivers of collaboration and research. With this in mind, the Independent Schools Council Digital Strategy Group launched an action research project last spring. The study was managed by Ian Phillips, Assistant Headteacher at Haberdashers’ Aske’s Boys’ School (@IanHabs) and involved teachers and pupils from seven schools completing questionnaires and interviews on the impact of the introduction of Virtual Reality into the classroom. 

The results of the study were published in November as Growth Headset: Exploring the use of Virtual Reality and Augmented Reality in Schools written by Dr James Mannion (@RethinkingJames). The most common theme to emerge from the research was that Virtual Reality technology can be used to facilitate learning in two ways: first, through visualisation and seeing in 3-D; and, secondly, by providing an interactive and more immersive learning environment which makes topics more memorable compared to textbooks. Whilst some teachers in the study expressed concerns about the logistics of using Virtual Reality in the classroom, the majority of students and teachers were able to share examples of where they felt using Virtual Reality had had a positive impact on learning, or where it is likely to have a positive impact on learning in the future. Thus, the Growth Headset report provides some initial insight into how Virtual Reality might be deployed in schools and seeks to answer some of the important questions about the place that this technology might play in schools over the coming years.

The verdict

The use of Virtual Reality in the classroom is still in its infancy but there are already signs that this is a much more powerful technology than its more passive predecessors. The lessons from the pioneers is that VR is not just another way of conveying information, but there is something distinctively powerful about the fact that the viewer is in control. This makes the experience active and so immersive that they evoke an emotional as well as a rational response. 

Virtual Reality allows the teacher to put a young person into the shoes of another person. Early adopters are divided over whether or not Virtual Reality is what Chris Milk in his TED Talk describes as the ‘ultimate empathy machine’ . Some believe that Virtual Reality has huge potential to foster greater awareness of what it is like to be a refugee or live with a disability; and that its contribution to the educational armoury will be as an effective tool for teaching empathy, a trait so often lacking in teenagers. However, some respondents in the ISC Research project expressed scepticism, as can be seen in the following exchange: 

 I’ve heard a lot of positive things about the creation of empathy, and I am very sceptical about that… [they say] it's a wonderful experience to be able to teach students to be empathetic like what's it like to live in a slum. And I feel that they just can't be right because it's a bit like giving someone a seat and saying “this is what it's like to not be able to use your legs”, or “this is what it feels like to not be able to hear”. The students will never be able to know that because that's something that's really personal and I think that we dumb down the experience by suggesting that in any way we can replicate it. It might give an insight, but it doesn't create empathy in and of itself. 

Best Practice

Going forward, we need to develop policies and protocols to disseminate best practice. For example, at JESS, we have found (the hard way) that primary children are best using Virtual Reality headsets sitting down and that that they hold the viewer to their eyes, rather than being strapped on, so that they can disengage from the experience more easily. Furthermore, as my lift experience illustrates, Virtual Reality is a very powerful tool which can elicit a whole range of emotional responses from the participants and thus needs to be used with care. Teachers need to be sensitive and alert to the potential that the experience of ‘going over the top’ from a First World War trench might be so real that it is traumatic. Lessons need to be planned so that there is time to allow children to talk about their experiences and to ‘decompress’ before heading off to their next lesson. 

One of the determining factors in whether or not Virtual Reality has an impact on wider schooling will be the extent to which industry can supply a broad range of high-quality content that starts with the curriculum rather than teachers having to appropriate apps for use in the classroom. As with so many new technologies, educational priorities must drive the technological ones. Without this, it is likely that the adoption of Virtual Reality in schools remains the preserve of a few schools with dedicated enthusiasts. 

• The ISC Digital Strategy report can be downloaded from http://iscdigital.co.uk/growth-headset-the-report/ 
• Videos of most of the VR projects at JESS, Dubai, can be found on the JESS Digital YouTube Channel 

This article was published in Tes on 29/01/2019 as Virtual reality: not the edu-fad it is made out to be?

How to build a #FutureSchool: The key to Digital Transformation in Schools

This presentation outlines why schools should undertake digital transformation and how to do it, The presentation was given at the ISC Digital Strategy Conference at Radley College Oxon UK on Thursday 29th November.

 

#FutureSchool - How AI, VR and Robots are transforming how children learn

Presentation given at the Middle East Schools Leadership Conference on Wednesday 10th October 2018

 

The Fourth Education Revolution – Anthony Seldon – Book Summary

The Fourth Education Revolution is about likely impact of Artificial Intelligence on society. Sir Anthony Seldon, the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Buckingham and previously Headteacher of two top HMC boarding schools, Brighton and Wellington Colleges, not only discusses the (AI) on education, but, perhaps more importantly, explores the philosophical and moral debates about the place of AI in society. Thus, this is an important book not just for those of us in education, but also beyond the profession. We could not be in better hands.

The book forms a logical structure argument for change. The first six chapters set the context for the debate by:

1. reviewing the first three educational revolutions; 
2. discussing what it means to be an educated person; 
3. discussing Five Intractable Problems with Conventional Education: 
4. discussing What is Intelligence? 
5. discussing What is Artificial Intelligence? 
6. reviewing the state of AI in the USA and the UK 

(Each of these chapters is worthy of consideration and is an interesting introduction and summary of these important areas)

The key chapter for secondary school educationists is his discussion of ‘The future of AI in Schools’ (Chapter 7). Here Seldon’s methodology (after Suskind and Suskind) is to establish a ten-part model for education by aggregating the tasks of the teacher and the student:

Five Traditional Tasks in Teaching: 

1. Preparation of material; 
2. Organisation of the classroom/ learning space; 
3. Ensuring that all students are engaged in learning; 
4. Setting and marking assignments; 
5. Preparation for terminal examinations and writing summative reports. 

Five Traditional Activities in Learning: 

1. Memorising knowledge; 
2. Applying the knowledge; 
3. Turning knowledge into understanding; 
4. Self-assessment and diagnosis; 
5. Reflection and the development of autonomous learning.

He then argues how each of five traditional factors in teaching will be transformed by AI over the coming decades: 

1. Preparation of material will be done by ‘Curation specialists . . whose job it is to work with AI machines to author and identify the most appropriate material for particular student profiles.’ p.189 
2. Organisation of the learning space: ‘Separate classrooms will disappear in time and replaced by pods and wide open, flexible spaces which can be configured for individual and flexible collective learning. Sensors will monitor individual students, measuring their physiological and psychological state, picking up on changes faster and more accurately than any teacher could.’ p.191 
3. Presentation of material to optimise learning/deeper understanding: ‘The flexibility of visual representation with AI allows material to be presented to students which renders much teacher exposition redundant.’ p.192 
4. Setting assignments and assessing/self-assessing progress: ‘Advances in real-time assessment enabled by AI will virtually eliminate this waiting period [the time lag between students being assessed and them receiving feedback on their performance} and ensure feedback comes when most useful for learning.’ pp.194-5. 
5. Preparation for terminal examinations and writing summative reports: ‘All this will be swept away by AI. . . . In its place will be attention to continuous data reporting, and real time feedback that will help students discover how to learn autonomously and how to address any deficiencies on their own.’ p.196 

And so to the $100.000.000 question: Will we need teachers in the future? Seldon is clear ‘We do not believe that it is either possible or desirable for AI to eliminate teachers from education’ but he goes on to point out that ‘the application of AI places more responsibility for learning in the hands of the student, for how their time is spent and on what, even from a young age.’ p.205. ‘AI will change however the job of the teacher forever. By supporting teaching in all their five traditional tasks, AI will usher in the biggest change the profession has ever seen.’ p.206. Interestingly Seldon recognises that remote teaching is a distinct possibility: ‘Imminent advances in virtual technologies will mean too that teachers no longer have to be physically present to offer their services.’ p.206

This is well drafted and highly informed argument. It was a joy to read. The only surprise and disappointment for me was that he did not address the 'Elephant-in-the-room' questions of how the traditional examination structures (especially GCSE and A-level in the UK) will be dismembered and on what time-scale. We can all see that the direction of travel is that GCSE and A-level will probably 'will be swept away by AI ' in twenty years' time, but how we get there and what the drivers will be is one of the greatest questions facing UK education over the coming years. These are essentially political questions and ones on which he, given his intimate knowledge of UK politics, Sir Anthony is uniquely qualified to comment - let's hope he does in due course.

#FutureSchool: How technology can help us educate the 263m children in the world who currently are not in education

The Challenge 

The greatest challenge in facing global education today is that there are an estimated 263 million children who are not in education (UNESCO Institute of Statistics Fact Sheet October 2016, No.39). Furthermore, the same report estimates that the world will need 3.3 million more primary school teachers and 5.1 million more lower secondary teachers by 2030 to meet future demand. 

The traditional model of one teacher taking a class of 20-30 pupils is unsustainable. 

What is clear from these projections that the traditional model of one teacher taking a class of 20-30 pupils is unsustainable – it is a luxury form of education which most societies cannot afford. We need to look for alternatives and, if we are to be successful, technology undoubtedly will have to have a large part to play. 

How Technology can make education more widely available 

Zero Marginal Cost 

One of the great advantages of digital technologies over traditional industrial models is that as a product becomes more widely available the marginal cost of producing additional units approaches zero. Compare, if you will, the costs associated with producing and distributing a print edition of a daily newspaper and a digital edition. For both formats there are a number of fixed costs (e.g. the salaries of the journalistic staff, the cost of running their offices etc.) However, for the print edition there are many more variable costs (e.g. more rolls of paper will be required to print more newspapers) which do not exist for the digital version. For the print edition there will always be an additional marginal cost of producing an additional newspaper; but it makes next to no difference if the newspaper distributes one digital copy or one million copies. We can apply the same principle to education: once a digital lesson has been produced, the marginal cost of distributing it around the world is almost zero. 

Online Learning Platforms 

Online learning programmes are becoming increasingly sophisticated. These platforms are driven by intelligent systems which promise to offer personalised learning experiences. Typically, the program ‘teaches’ a topic (through online videos and interactive exercises); then uses low-stakes testing to assess the student’s knowledge and understanding, high-lighting areas of strengths and weakness; before recommending which courses or units to do next. These platforms are still at a formative stage but there is no doubt that they have potential to be the true disruptor of education. As with all disruptive technologies they will initially be established at the margins of the educational sector, but, in time they will become accepted into the mainstream. 

Blended Learning Programmes 

There is little doubt that most Governments around the world will be attracted by online learning platforms in order to reduce the overall cost of education and to address concerns about teacher shortages. However, it must be recognised that schools fill other important social functions: they provide significant child care, thus releasing parents to participate in the work-force; they are places of socialisation, where young people learn to interact with each other and to become good citizens; and they ensure that all children within the system reach a minimum standard of education. It is very difficult to see how an education system that is wholly online will fulfil these functions at scale.

Blended Learning Programmes combine online learning with ‘brick-and-mortar’ education where the student attends a physical school with teachers so that there is a coherent programme of study. This combination of a traditional school experience with online learning has real potential to be the best of both worlds: providing a more cost-effective form of education which is more personalised than the present model, whilst maintaining the important social functions that schools fulfil. 

Remote Teaching and Virtual Reality Teaching 

One of the great benefits of the Internet is that we are now able to connect with people around the world typically through video-conferencing apps such as Skype or FaceTime. Communication technologies may also be harnessed by schools to allow ‘Remote Teaching’ i.e. live school lessons that taught by a teacher video-conferencing into the classroom. The problem with this is that it is difficult for a remote teacher to engage the pupils. 

360 Degree Camera in French Lesson
Virtual Reality Teaching

At JESS, Dubai we are taking this idea to the next level. ‘Virtual Reality Teaching’ (VRT) has the potential to allow children in Calcutta to feel as if they are in a classroom at JESS, Dubai. Earlier this year, we conducted a “proof-of-concept” test of VRT aiming to give students an immersive experience of being in a classroom, rather than passively watching a video-conferencing screen. This involved putting a 360-degree camera in the second row of a classroom and running a live stream to a classroom next door where three students wearing VR headsets ‘participated virtually’ in the lesson. The experience was so real that the pupils found themselves putting up their hand to answer the teacher’s questions! (A video of the experiment is on the JESS Digital YouTube Channel.) We are confident that it is only a matter of time before students will be able to attend class at JESS remotely via VTC. 

Robots and Supporting Personalised Learning 

Technology is doing to have its greatest impact in personalised learning by making highly specialised support more widely available. A great example of this is the way in which robots are being used to deliver lessons in a way that promotes engagement in learners with Autism. The Robots4Autism project which has built Milo, a humanoid robot, can walk, talk and even model human facial expressions; and never gets frustrated or tired. Milo helps these learners improve their social and behavioural skills and thus to gain the confidence to succeed academically and socially. 

Final Remarks 

New technology has promised for the past thirty years that it will entirely transform education and I suspect that it will be a number of years before it delivers on that promise. However, there is huge potential here to get much closer to educating those 263m children who presently are not able to go to school.

This article was written for the Edarabia Network

Innovation and Digital Learning

A presentation given at the Education Experts Conference on Monday 5th March 2018 in Dubai.
This presentation considers four aspects of the #FutureSchool:

1. The Paperless Classroom; 
2. Blended Learning Programmes; 
3. AI, Pupil Tracking and the end of School Reports; and 
4. Robots in the Classroom to support Personalised Learning.

 

#Futureproofing your School: A Toolkit for Bursars

A presentation given to the COBIS Bursars' Conference at Dubai College on Friday 2nd February 2018.

The Digital #FutureSchool - Automation, Innovation, Disruption

A Presentation given at the ISC Digital Strategy Group Conference held at Microsoft, Reading on 30th November 2017

 

How top schools can help educate the 263m children in the world who are not in education.

Interview about how top schools can use new technologies, such as Virtual Reality teaching and Blended Learning, to educate some of the 263m children who are not in education.

 

Interview at the HMC Annual Conference in London, 04/10/2017

How Disruptive Innovation may change schools in the future: Lessons from Dubai

Presentation given at the HMC Conference in Belfast on Wednesday 4th October 2017.

Dubai The UAE has the fastest growing private schools’ sector in the world; and Dubai has more international schools than any other city. This rapid expansion has necessitated innovation and has led to the development of new models and structures for schooling. For these reasons, Dubai is a strong candidate to be the birthplace of a “disruptive innovation” that will transform secondary education around the globe. So what lessons can we learn from the private schools’ sector in Dubai? 

Four lessons from Dubai 

1. The Not-for-Profit (NFP) Sector was not equipped to meet the rapid growth in demand for schooling. The earliest international schools in Dubai were established in the 1960s and 1970s with financial support from the Ruler, Sheikh Rashhid, and the Oil and Gas companies and supporting industries. They were established as Not-for-Profit entities. NFP organisations are by their very nature more conservative and were not equipped to expand and develop sufficiently quickly and so For-Profit companies have filled the space. The NFP schools remain the top schools in Dubai but today they represent only about 3% of the school places in Dubai. 
2. The For-Profit groups offer education at different price points: The For-Profit sector in Dubai, unsurprisingly is driven by the economic drivers of ‘return-on-investment’, ‘economies of scale’, scalability, differentiated markets and keep costs down – especially of staffing. The For-Profit groups offer Premium, Mid-range and Budget in the same way that airlines offer First Class, Business and Economy seats on their planes. The differentiators between the price points are school and class size, the range of facilities available in the school, the qualifications of teachers, and the amount of teacher-pupil contact time in the week. 
3. The For-Profit Groups invest in central I.T. systems: Large schools groups have levered technology to achieve economies of scale to achieve a measure of standardisation and to share best practice. For example, Nord Anglia and GEMS have both developed global CPD portals for teachers; and GEMS have developed a shared VLE for their schools. 
4. Schools in Dubai embrace innovation GEMS Wellington Silicon Oasis is pioneering “Blended Learning” IB program, where students use a combination of online resources and video-conferencing. JESS currently has a group who are experimenting with Virtual Reality technology as a way of making JESS lessons available beyond the physical bounds of the school. 

Research into Alternative Models for Secondary Schooling – Replacing Teachers 

My research was for a Dissertation for MSc Executive Masters in Management with Ashridge-Hult Business School (May 2017). This (small sample) study investigated why alternative models for secondary schooling have not been adopted in the way that they are being adopted in tertiary education, by comparing the attitudes of School Principals (educationalists) to the attitudes of School Owners/CEOS (business people). The study broke down (‘decomposed’ – after Susskind 2015) into seven tasks which specialist teachers (e.g. a Physics teacher) do: 

1. Lesson Planning 
2. Teaching – to transmit/impart subject information 
3. Teaching – to set tasks to groups of students 
4. Classroom Management and Supervision 
5. Working with Individual Students 
6. Assessment, Grading and Monitoring 
7. Parental Communication and Reporting 

The two study groups were asked if it would be acceptable to practice in their school for that task to be done by an alternative to a specialist teacher:

1. A Non-Specialist - A qualified teacher who is not a qualified specialist in the relevant subject to be taught; 
2. A Teaching Assistant who is not a qualified teacher; 
3. A Specialist Teacher via Video-Conferencing - A qualified subject specialist teacher who is not physically present who contacts the students via video-conferencing. 
4. An Online Learning Programme which students access via a computer in school. 

This study found that both School Owners/CEOs and School Leaders are resistant to replacing “specialist classroom teachers” with “qualified teachers who are not subject specialists” and with “teaching assistants”; but found an openness to replacing them with “specialists teaching via video-conferencing” or through students using “online learning platforms”. 

This study found that the potential “drivers” towards the adoption of these models are: 

1. Improved Pedagogy 
2. Reducing Costs 
3. Addressing Teacher recruitment issues 

This study found that the potential “blockers” to the adoption of these models are:

1. Concerns about the Quality of Student Learning; 
2. Concerns about a Change in Ethos of the School; 
3. Concerns about Parental Reaction. 

This study found that alternative models for secondary schooling have not been adopted because both the majority of School Owners/CEOs and School Leaders see no reason to change as the status quo still works. However, it is likely a potential shortage of specialist teachers will serve as the catalyst for the adoption of alternative models for schooling.  

Looking into the Crystal Ball – Five Prophecies for the Future of Schooling around the World 

So if we apply the principles of Dubai’s For-Profit sector to the global Learning-School problem, what solutions might we see?

1. Education For-Profit will become the norm around the world.
   
   Not-for-Profit education is not equipped to meet the global demand for education, the inevitable consequence is that the For-Profit sector will fill the void. 
2. Being taught by a specialist teacher in a classroom at Secondary level will be a luxury.
   
   Technology won’t replace teachers everywhere – but it will in many places. In the future, it will only be Premium Secondary Education that will be delivered by specialist teachers in classrooms drawing on a range of real and virtual resources. This will remain the norm in the UK Independent Sector and in top International Schools around the world. Budget Secondary Education will not have subject teachers, but will be delivered totally through online courses on learning platforms. However, for many young people around the world this will be better than the present situation of receiving no education at all. Mid-Range Secondary Education will be delivered by “super-teachers” via Virtual-Reality Conferencing. The For-Profit will invest in new technologies in order to maximise the impact of teachers and these will become much more common around the world, particular where Governments are funding schooling. For example, the US Public School system is in the vanguard of this (for an overview see Keeping Pace with K-12 Digital Learning, 2015). To date there has been little appetite for adopting this model in the UK as was witnessed earlier this year when counsellors rejected the plans to use Blended Learning at the Ark Pioneer Academy in Barnet (see TES 30/01/2017). 
3. Blended Learning and Virtual Reality Teaching will be the disruptors of Secondary education.
   
   Blended Learning has scope both to raise standards by personalising education and to reduce costs. As the platforms and content improve, we will see their wider adoption. We also already have ‘Virtual Teaching’ through video conferencing which enables pupils around the world to be taught live by a remote teacher. Furthermore, ‘Virtual Reality’ already enables pupils to travel through time and space – to experience the ancient Colosseum in Rome, life in the trenches or a World-War One dog-fight with the Red Baron. Once these two technologies are combined so that we have ‘Virtual Reality Teaching’, it will be possible for a pupil can put on a headset and ‘feel’ as if they are in a real classroom with a world-class teacher, or be taken on a virtual school visit to any place in time and space. 
4. There will be ‘superstar teachers’ commanding very high salaries.
   
   One of the consequences of the rise of Virtual Reality Teaching is that there will be the rise of superstar teachers. The For-Profit sector has a proven record of investing in talent where it can made wider savings. It will inevitably pay to attract top talent, particularly in shortage subjects and their global educational networks will provide a platform which will enable great Virtual Reality teachers will be able to reach millions of students. These teachers will inevitably be very well paid and, given the nature of the C21, it is likely that they will be famous and become celebrities. 
5. Primary Teachers will be assisted by Robots.
   
   Young children at a formative stage of development need human interaction to shape their learning, thus it is highly unlikely that it will ever be possible to replace teachers in primary schools with technological solutions. One consequence of the predictions for secondary education outlined above is that primary schooling will need to teach the skills to enable young people to access non-classroom based forms of education. It is quite possible that robots will replace Teaching Assistants, performing basic instructive tasks such as teaching basic mathematics and listening to children read. 

Final Thoughts on the Future of Schooling 

Prophecy is more about reading the signs of the time and working out a likely a future position from the current direction of travel, rather than predicting the future receiving some dislocated revelation from on high. Prophets are rarely popular because they are usually delivering a message that people don't want to hear. I believe that the signs for a possible future of schooling are there for all to see. In an ideal world every child in the world would receive the quality of education that is available at a HMC school but, for reasons of logistics alone, that isn’t going to happen. However, I do believe that technology has a very important part to play in giving every child the opportunity to have at least some form of basic education. Indeed, there is real scope here for Not-for-Profit schools to open their virtual doors and allow children around the world to experience the world-class teaching that takes place in our schools.  

Three Questions to consider 

1. What will the future workplace look like?
2. What will schools look like in the future? 
3. What should we be teaching young people to prepare them for the future? 

The Future of Schooling - Interview with Relocate Magazine

Interview with Relocate Magazine about the Future of Schooling, filmed at the COBIS Conference in Greenwich, London on 07/05/2017

The COBIS Future of Schooling Debate

This presenatation was given the 36th Annual COBIS Conference in Greenwich on Sunday 7th May, 2017

The Future of Schooling - Lessons from Dubai

This presentation was given at the 36th Annual COBIS Conference in Greenwich, London, on Sunday 7th May, 2017.

 

Has the time come to start replacing Secondary Teachers with Para-Teachers and the Application of Technology?

Ideal World v Reality

In an ideal world we would want every secondary school child to be taught by a suitably qualified specialist teacher, however we are far from that reality. 

• On a global level according to UNESCO, there are an estimated 263 million children who are not in education and the world will need 5.1 million more lower Secondary teachers by 2030 to meet future demand. 
• On a more parochial level, the UK National Audit Office report Training New Teachers (10 Feb 2016) showed that the proportion of physics classes taught by a teacher without a post A-level physics qualification rose from 21% in 2010 to 28% in 2014; Indeed the Institute of Physics in 2010 estimated that some 500 secondary schools in the UK didn't have a qualified Physics teacher.

Given that the teacher recruitment crisis is only set to get worse, has the time come to review the role of teachers and to look for new models for our schools?

In The Future of the Professions Richard and Daniel Susskind argue there needs to be new business models for education:

‘It is widely recognised that there is insufficient funding available to run high quality schools and universities if teachers and professors operate in the traditional way.’ (p.208)

Revisiting the Role of the Teacher

Susskind and Susskind  argue that professional work should be 'decomposed', that is broken down into constituent ‘tasks’ and that a 'Process Analyst' should determine if these tasks could be carried out by a less qualified Para-Professional or indeed  by the application of technology (See previous blogpost for a summary of some of their key arguments). 

So what of teaching? Can teaching can be decomposed and the tasks either delegated to a 'Para-Teacher' or performed by the application of technology?

Teaching Decomposed

It is undoubtedly possible to break down 'Teaching' into a whole range of tasks. Indeed Governments and Trade Unions around the world have a range of views of what should be (and what should not be) the tasks that teachers do. It is difficult to find either a consensus or a list that comes without a political agenda. However, the US Department of Labor Bureau of Statistics (2015) Occupational Outlook Handbook, which is fundamentally an official careers advice site, lists ten 'duties' of a high school teacher which appear in most other lists:

Screenshot of US Department of Labor Bureau of Statistics Occupational Outlook Handbook entry for High School Teachers (captured 17/03/2017)

Process Analysis of the 10 teacher tasks:

We then need to determine which (if any) of these tasks could be carried out by a less qualified Para-Professional or indeed  by the application of technology.

Is doing this task not getting the most out of a qualified Physics teacher?

One way to facilitate tackling this question is to imagine a school that only has one suitably qualified Physics teacher when it really needs three. The school leader might want to maximise the impact that the one Physics teacher has on the teaching of Physics across the whole school. Which of the following tasks would the school leader be able to delegate to a lesser qualified Para-professional (or non-Physics graduate qualified teacher)? Can any of the tasks be carried out by the application of technology?

1. Planning Physics lessons;
2. Assessing students to evaluate their abilities, strengths, and weaknesses in Physics;
3. Teaching students Physics in full class settings or in small groups;
4. Adapting Physics lessons to any changes in class size;
5. Grading students’ assignments and exams to monitor progress in Physics;
6. Communicating with parents about students’ progress in Physics;
7. Working with individual students to challenge them, to improve their abilities in Physics, and to work on their weaknesses;
8. Preparing students for standardized Physics tests required by the state; 
9. Developing and enforcing classroom rules and administrative policies; 
10. Supervising students outside of the classroom—for example, at lunchtime or during detention;

A Process Analysis might decide that 

1. Planning Physics lessons needs to be done by a Physics professional, However, the planning of lessons could be centralised and done by one person who ideally (but not necessarily) would be in the school.
2. Assessing students might be done in a number of ways including by professional judgment of a Physics teacher; by tests marked by the Physics teacher or by a Para-Teacher with a mark scheme; and by online adaptive testing.
3. Teaching students might be done in a number of ways including by a Physics teacher physically in front of a class or by video-conferencing; by online lectures; and through online courses.
4. Adapting Physics lessons might be done most easily by a Physics professional, but can also be done by adaptive online courses.
5. Grading students’ assignments and exams by professional judgment of a Physics teacher or by a Para-Teacher based on assessment and objective criteria; and electronically as the result of online adaptive testing.
6. Communicating with parents about students’ progress might be done through traditional means such as written subject reports or parent-teacher meetings, but might also be done through teachers have 'live' online markbooks which are available to parents.
7. Working with individual students is best done by a Physics professional.
8. Preparing students for exams might be done by revision lessons run by a Physics professional, but increasingly there are online revision resources (e.g. BBC GCSE Bitesize) and online self-testing programs.
9. Developing and enforcing classroom rules is not directly Physics related and could theoretically be carried out by a less qualified Para-Professional.
10. Supervising students outside of the classroom  could be carried out by a less qualified Para-Professional.

Decomposition and the Question of Quality of Outcomes for Student Learning

The next step is for the Process Analyst to determine the relative quality of outcomes for student learning of these teacher tasks being performed by a qualified classroom teacher following the traditional model and the alternatives: the 'Para-Teacher' or 'Application of Technology' models. 

If we accept that Assessing Students might be done by a Para-Teacher with a mark scheme or by online adaptive testing. are these alternative models better/similar/ worse for student learning  than assessments conducted by a qualified Teacher?

Whilst the qualified professional is likely to be qualitatively better at conducting many of the teacher tasks, it is quite possible that there are circumstances where the alternative models may be better, particularly when we take the matter of scale into consideration. For example, a teacher may be able to produce personalised learning plans which address individual concerns and go at an appropriate pace for each student for a small number of students, but this level of differentiation may not be possible when teaching a large number of sets and with large class sizes. Conversely, an online adaptive course with built-in assessments might be able to provide personalised learning plans and assessments for thousands of pupils at a time.

And so . . . .?

As the statistics given at the start of this post suggest, we are already facing a challenge of recruitment of specialist teachers. Many schools are already having to explore alternative models to staff lessons in 'shortage subjects'. 

We have to recognise that the traditional model of a suitably qualified specialist teacher standing in front of a class of 30 pupils is a luxury form of education which most societies can no longer afford.

Although many in the profession recoil at the thought of revisiting our traditional classroom model, it is time to abandon our idealism and find a way of delivering the best possible form of schooling that is practically possible. The 'Para-Teacher' and the 'Application of Technology' are likely to have a significant part to play in the future of secondary education.

The Future of the Professions by Richard and Daniel Susskind - Summary of some key ideas

Richard and Daniel Susskind's The Future of the Professions challenges the view that white collar jobs will be immune from the impact of technological advances into the workplace. Indeed, the authors go so far as to detail the road map 'how technology will transform the work of human experts':

'In the long run, increasingly capable machines will transform the work of professionals giving rise to new ways of sharing practical expertise in society' (p.303) 

with a consequence that

'Decades from now, today's professions will play a much less prominent role in society.' (p.271) 

They argue that reform of the professions is not only inevitable, but that it is long overdue.

The role of the professions - the Grand Bargain

At the heart of Susskind and Susskind's argument is a particular understanding of the relationship between society and the professions. 'The professions are responsible for many of the most important functions and services in society' and their fundamental role ‘is to provide access to knowledge and experience that non specialists lack’ (p.268).  Society affords the professions protection and status in return for providing these services fairly in an arrangement which they call 'the grand bargain':

'In acknowledgement of and in return for their expertise, experience, and judgement, which they are expected to apply in delivering affordable, accessible, up-to-date, reassuring, and reliable services  . . . we (society) place our trust in the professions in granting them exclusivity over a wide range of socially significant services and activities, by paying them a fair wage, by conferring upon them independence, autonomy, rights of self-determination, and by according them respect and status.' (p.23)

Thus the purpose of the professions is to provide solutions to issues which individuals within society commonly face: ill-health, disputes, lack of education, the need for news and navigating the tax system.

The authors believe that the professions are ripe for reform and should lose their privileged status because they have broken this bargain, in that they do not provide these services that are either 'affordable' or 'accessible':

'levels of access and affordability to the practical expertise that the professions provide fall short of acceptable. The combination of these two reasons - the importance of what they provide, and the current inadequacy of the provision - overwhelms the case to protect the craft.' (p.247 - also p.269)

Automation and Transformation of the Professions

The authors outline how automation is likely to come to the professions by examining some of the practices that have been adopted by those in the vanguard of change:

Education

• Online learning - Khan Academy etc.
• Flipped Blended Learning
• Learning Analytics

Law

• Document Assembly Systems (e.g. ContractExpress) which can generate high quality documents after interactive consultations with users.
• Online Dispute Resolution (e.g. Modria which is behind eBay and PayPal's resolution service)

Tax and Audit

• Online computerised tax preparation software (e.g. TurboTax in the US)
• Online Accounting software (e.g. Quickbooks)
• Computer-Assisted Audit Techniques (e.g. PwC's system, Aura)

Medicine

• 'Telemedicine' using video links to make diagnoses or to aid with operations from a distance;
• Robots assisting surgeons to conduct delicate operations with greater dexterity than is possible by a human;
• the rise of online medical platforms and 'GP intelligent monitoring', 'remote monitoring' by smart devices and apps;
• Robotic Pharmacy (e.g. the University of California at San Francisco which has a pharmacy staffed by a single robot);

Eight Patterns and Trends

Decomposition, Process Analysts, Para-professionals and Delegation

One of the most important observations that Susskind and Susskind make is that when we are talking about the future of the professions, we need to move on from seeing the machine v human debate in binary terms. They are not talking about a robot replacing a lawyer/teacher/doctor in the way that a robot might replace a human worker on the production line of a car manufacturing plant. However when we 'decompose' or break down what lawyers/teachers/doctors do into tasks, we can see there there is scope for some of these to replaced with automated systems - or indeed by lesser qualified human beings.

We argue that professional work should be decomposed, that is broken down into constituent ‘tasks’ – identifiable, distinct, and separate modules of work that make it up. Once decomposed, the challenge then is to identify the most efficient way of executing each type of task, constituent with the quality of work needed, the level of human interaction required, and the ease with which the decomposed tasks can be managed alongside one another and pulled together into a coherent offering. (p.212)

Leading on from this, the authors argue that one of the key roles for professional organisations in the future is that of the 'process analyst' whose role is 'to identify the level of person best suited for the range of decomposed tasks (p.124).

On analysis, it is frequently becoming apparent in various disciplines that para-professional who are sufficiently trained, knowledgeable, and equipped can undertake tasks that were previously taken on by senior professionals. (p.124-5)

The delegation to para-professionals may lead to replacement by automated systems:

The features of tasks in the workplace that make them amenable to delegation and para-professionalization - that they are well bounded and can, in part, be captured in standard processes - are precisely those features that render them strong candidates in due course for the application of technology (both automation and innovation). (p.125) 

Decomposition and Para-professionalism in Schools?

This all begs the question of whether or not teaching can be decomposed and the tasks either delegated to a 'Para-Teacher' or performed by the application of technology. This is the subject of my Master's Dissertation with the Ashridge-Hult Business School and I will be discussing some of the ideas here in a subsequent blogpost.