Talk:The schome vision

From The SchomEmunity Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

I want it to be about being in control of our own learning. Not jumping through hoops other people have created for me. I like working with other people, learning from each other, exploring things with them, and then being able to go off and think about it a bit on my own. I want people who will help me direct how I am going to find things out, and what it is that I actually want to find out! Questions...what they should we answer them... That's what gets me learning.

Well, it's a start...


So many aspects to this! I agree with Jonty's starting points - must include elements of community (including global citizenship), authenticity, learner empowerment (including control and direction), mathetical support (see mathetics), plurality. Implicit in this are notions such as self-motivation, intrinsic rewards, etc..

Other things that must be in there include: accreditation (see the assessment problem); funding; physical as well as virtual spaces (to provide supervision, social interaction, collaboration, access to resources, etc).

Assumptions which schome should NOT be based on include: grouping by age, subject based teaching/learning, timetabled (9 to 3.30, or rigid 60 minute slots), one adult to many children (with adult as focus of attention) - in other words all the basic assumptions that underpin our current understanding of school.

I'm really torn about the extent to which schome will have a pre-defined curriculum - on the one hand that mitigates against learner control - on the other there are things that I think everyone should learn (eg personal finance, communication skills, etc.) - but maybe these come through the hidden curriculum in the way that schome is set up.

Ooh - and schome is about lifelong learning, by which I don't mean post 16 or adult - I mean cradle to grave learning (really lifelong!).


schome vision individualised learning

There seems to be no problem here for me. Individual should be able to log on and ask for answers to questions or to challenge answers. We don't need to prescribe any curriculum or content at all but may need to start the ball rolling with some questions.If is starts to get a little tired we can insert a new question to start the debate again - could be good fun for all ages.

Bob Mountjoy

But the killer question then becomes how to assess it (see the assessment problem) so that it is 'valued'. PeterT 15:14, 28 Apr 2005 (BST)

Vision vs pragmatics

I am wondering about the tension between developing our vision - starting from a clean page with no preconceptions - and the pragmatics of getting schome to actually happen.

If our vision is as radical as I suspect it might be if we are genuinly developing a system that meets the needs of the Info Age then we are in danger of being treated as cranks. If we are too pragmatic - and tone down the vision then we are indanger of ending up with something that is not as good as it should be (but that would get support from the powers that be). This tension is evident in our thinking about the assessment problem.

In order for schome to succed we need a vision AND a strategy from getting from where we are now to that vision. Logic tells me that the vision needs to come first - but ...
PeterT 07:05, 18 May 2005 (BST)

Dissatisfaction is not just here

I've just read several artcles and comments from links in a blog newspaper by Stephen Downes. (1) Bill Gates' "America’s high schools are obsolete" Speech to the National Governor's Association 2.26.2005 National Education Summit on High Schools

Prepared remarks by Bill Gates, Co-founder he is clearly not happy with the state of America's high schools. One concern is the need to promote equity through education. He cites some acheivements and says...

"These are schools built on principles that can be applied anywhere – the new three R’s, the basic building blocks of better high schools:

The first R is Rigor – making sure all students are given a challenging curriculum that prepares them for college or work; The second R is Relevance – making sure kids have courses and projects that clearly relate to their lives and their goals; The third R is Relationships – making sure kids have a number of adults who know them, look out for them, and push them to achieve. "

(2)Alan November is advocating a cultural revolution in education - there is a video of his talk at

Twitchsepeed Generation

This is my first post here - please be gentle with me! Re: the strapline, I am VERY fund (please don't all shout me down at once!) of the Marc Prensky phrase Twitchspeed Generation. When I have spoken at conferences, and quoted him, it is the single time when pens furiously scribble down what I've just said! As a teacher and parent of 2 young kids I can totally identify with him when he says we feed children a diet of 100 mile an hour information on tv, computers and games etc., yet when they enter a classroom (but not MINE, I hasten to add) they are given the equivalent of depressants. So I like 'Twitchspeed Generation' as it does not specify INFORMATION/TECHNOLOGY/DIGITAL etc. as being the important part of the concept. --Wellfan 11:42, 27 Jul 2005 (BST)

Summary of concensus so far

Schome will be learner centred - learners will be in control of their own learing, whilst being provided with support that helps them direct how and what they are learning about. It will include both physical and virtual spaces - but we must avoid being constrained by the assumptions that underpin school when thinking about what these will be like. Schome will cater for all ages of learners - cradle to grave learning.

Solving the assessment problem is key to the development of schome - schome must provide accreditation, but how?

So far lots of nice wooley words - but what will schome actually look like - perhaps some schome vignettes would help?