Finland ideas for US education

OPINION: Can this 12-step program from Finland aid U.S. education?

 Finland system consistently receives top marks from UNICEF, the OECD and the World Economic Forum.
Many U.S. states are similar in population size and demographics to Finland, and education is largely run at the state level. In the economically depressed forest region of North Karelia — on the Russian border — where we spent much of our time, the unemployment rate is nearly 15 percent, compared with under 5 percent in America and our home state of New York. However, the U.S. child poverty rate is four times higher than Finland’s.
Delegations and universities from China and around the developing world are visiting Finland to learn how to improve their own school systems.Singapore has launched a series of Finnish-style school reforms.

n Finland, we heard none of the clichés common in U.S. education reform circles, like “rigor,” “standards-based accountability,” “data-driven instruction,” “teacher evaluation through value-added measurement” or getting children “college- and career-ready” starting in kindergarten.

Instead, Finnish educators and officials constantly stressed to us their missions of helping every child reach his or her full potential and supporting all children’s well-being. “School should be a child’s favorite place,” said Heikki Happonen, an education professor at the University of Eastern Finland and an authority on creating warm, child-centered learning environments.

How can the United States improve its schools? We can start by piloting and implementing these 12 global education best practices, many of which are working extremely well for Finland:

1) Emphasize well-being.

2) Upgrade testing and other assessments. 

3) Invest resources fairly.

4) Boost learning through physical activity. 

5) Change the focus. Create an emotional atmosphere and physical environment of warmth, comfort and safety so that children are happy and eager to come to school. Teach not just basic skills, but also arts, crafts, music, civics, ethics, home economics and life skills.

6) Make homework efficient. Reduce the homework load in elementary and middle schools to no more than 30 minutes per night, and make it responsibility-based rather than stress-based.

7) Trust educators and children. Give them professional respect, creative freedom and autonomy, including the ability to experiment, take manageable risks and fail in the pursuit of success.

8) Shorten the school day. Deliver lessons through more efficient teaching and scheduling, as Finland does. Simplify curriculum standards to a framework that can fit into a single book, and leave detailed implementation to local districts.

9) Institute universal after-school programs.

10) Improve, expand and destigmatize vocational and technical education.   Encourage more students to attend schools in which they can acquire valuable career/trade skills.

11) Launch preventive special-education interventions early and aggressively. 

12) Revamp teacher training toward a medical and military model. Shift to treating the teaching profession as a critical national security function requiring government-funded, graduate-level training in research and collaborative clinical practice, as Finland does.

+++++++++++
more on Finland Phenomenon in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=finland+phenomenon

personalized learning in the digital age

If This Is the End of Average, What Comes Next?

By Daniel T. Willingham     Jun 11, 2018

Todd Rose, the director of the Mind, Brain, and Education program at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, has emerged as a central intellectual figure behind the movement. In particular, his 2016 book, “The End of Average,” is seen as an important justification for and guide to the personalization of learning.

what Rose argues against. He holds that our culture is obsessed with measuring and finding averages—averages of human ability and averages of the human body. Sometimes the average is held to be the ideal.

The jaggedness principle means that many of the attributes we care about are multi-faceted, not of a whole. For example, human ability is not one thing, so it doesn’t make sense to talk about someone as “smart” or “dumb.” That’s unidimensional. Someone might be very good with numbers, very bad with words, about average in using space, and gifted in using of visual imagery.

Since the 1930s, psychologists have debated whether intelligence is best characterized as one thing or many.

But most psychologists stopped playing this game in the 1990s. The resolution came through the work of John Carroll, who developed a third model in which abilities form a hierarchy. We can think of abilities as separate, but nested in higher-order abilities. Hence, there is a general, all-purpose intelligence, and it influences other abilities, so they are correlated. But the abilities nested within general intelligence are independent, so the correlations are modest. Thus, Rose’s jaggedness principle is certainly not new to psychology, and it’s incomplete.

The second (Context Principle) of Rose’s principles holds that personality traits don’t exist, and there’s a similar problem with this claim: Rose describes a concept with limited predictive power as having none at all. The most commonly accepted theory holds that personality can be described by variation on five dimensions

Rose’s third principle (pathways principle) suggests that there are multiple ways to reach a goal like walking or reading, and that there is not a fixed set of stages through which each of us passes.

Rose thinks students should earn credentials, not diplomas. In other words, a school would not certify that you’re “educated in computer science” but that you have specific knowledge and skills—that you can program games on handheld devices, for example. He think grades should be replaced by testaments of competency (my note: badges); the school affirms that you’ve mastered the skills and knowledge, period. Finally, Rose argues that students should have more flexibility in choosing their educational pathways.

=++++++++++++++++
more on personalized learning in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=personalized+learning

hi ed leader team

5 SECRETS TO DEVELOPING A HIGH-PERFORMING TEAM IN HIGHER EDUCATION
Patrick Sanaghan & Jillian Lohndorf

https://www.academia.edu/8335887/Ways_to_Improve_Teams_in_Higher_Education

6 POTENTIALLY DESTRUCTIVE MYTHS
#1: THE MYTH ABOUT TALENT
A variety of skills, experiences,and perspectives are necessary,along with high levels of trust, open communication, emotional support, and mutual accountability—all of which arevery hard to establish and maintain. One differentiator of an exceptional team is a high level of curiosity where questions(not hidden criticisms) are prized.

#2: THE MYTH ABOUT FOCUS

stellar teams allocate their time in an unexpected way. They spend two-thirds of their time on thetask at hand (gettin’ ‘er done) and a full one-third on the “process” or relational aspect of the team’s functioning

#3: THE MYTH ABOUT CONFLICT

Exceptional teams see conflict as a resource, not something to be avoided.

Leaders need both the skill and the courage to deal with conflict on their team, as well as the understanding that everyone on the team needs to be involved in its resolution. 

#4: THE MYTH ABOUT OPENNESS

  • the “ seduction of the leader ” syndrome frequently seen in higher education.  Due to the “collegial” and polite nature of most campuses, people simply don’t feel comfortable providing honest feedback,especially if it is negative or critical. 
  • Many people are reluctant to be honest, because it might hurt someone’s feelings. 
  • People don’t want to “lose their seat at the table” and fear that they risk doing so if they are truly honest.
  • People realize that the leader really isn’t open to honest feedback, even as the leader professes to want it

#5: THE MYTH ABOUT SAMENESS

One of the pervasive team dynamics that every team leader needs to be aware of is
“comfortable cloning.”
 This happens when we select people to be on our teams who have similar backgrounds to ours.

#6: THE MYTH ABOUT MOTIVATIONAL METAPHORS

One of the best ways to build a realteam is to have each team membershare their own metaphor for how theywould like the team to operate.

5 STRATEGIES FOR DEVELOPING A STELLAR TEAM

1. Make your team a learning team, by creating an internal article or book club.

2. Define the rules for decision making.

3. Create working agreements or“ground rules” for the functioning and support of the team.

4. Establish a mechanism for regular, anonymous evaluation of team meetings.

5. Conduct a leadership “audit.”

++++++++++++++++++++++
more on leadership in higher ed in this IMS blog:
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=ed+leader

MinnState Online Strategies Team 3

SCTCC continue from

Tuesday, October 30 from 9:00am-3:00pm at the System Office, Wells Fargo Place (Saint Paul, MN).

Team 3 is charged with developing a process for prioritizing and selecting collaborative curriculum development and course offering projects that require the use of enterprise instructional design and technology services.

Have expertise in online education that you are willing to share?

The Online Strategy Workgroup needs subject matter experts to participate on one of the three teams below.

  • Team 1 (Access) –  Team 1 is charged with reviewing the existing services provided by the Minnesota State Info Hub and aligning the services they provide with the needs outlined in the corresponding action steps of the Online Strategy report.  This team will utilize the existing levels of funding allocated to the Minnesota State Info Hub without seeking additional financial compensation from campuses.  See what subject matter experts are needed for this team.
  • Team 2 (Quality) –  Team 2 is charged with reviewing the existing services provided by the Minnesota Online Quality Initiative (MOQI) and aligning these services with the needs outlined in the corresponding action steps of this report.  In addition to evaluating faculty development programming options available through MOQI, this team will be responsibility for developing the tools intended to support the quality improvement processes used by campuses.   See what subject matter experts are needed for this team.
  • Team 3 (Collaboration) -Team 3 is charged with developing a process for prioritizing and selecting online collaborative curriculum development and  online course offering projects that require the use of enterprise instructional design and technology services.  See what subject matter experts are needed for this team.

https://mnscu.sharepoint.com/teams/ENTPR-Online-Strategy/SitePages/Team-3—Collaboration.aspx  MinnState STAR ID login: STARID@minnstate.edu

+++++++++++++
November 20, 2016

Becky Lindseth, MIchael Olesen, Bob Bilyk, Stephen Kelly, Kim Lynch, Scott Wojtanowski, Wilson Garland, Martin Springborg, Scott W and Kim Lynch

Proposal Request / Background (description of project proposal)

where does CETL fit here.

https://www.grayassociates.com/

https://distanceminnesota.org/

program level course mapping.
course level modules and learning objectives.

RCE reasonable credit equivalency

IAA inter-agency agreement

RFP request for proposal

Collaborate on Curriculum and Course Offerings (Action A)
Adopting Open Educational Resources (OER) (Action A)
Revenue Sharing Model (Action D)
Instructional Design and Technology Services (Action C)

U of St. Thomas HyFlex model of course delivery

ELI Annual Meeting 2018

https://events.educause.edu/eli/annual-meeting/2018/agenda/the-hyflex-model-of-course-delivery-tribulations-triumphs-and-technology

From: EDUCAUSE Listserv <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU> on behalf of “Kinsella, John R.” <jrkinsella@STTHOMAS.EDU>
Reply-To: EDUCAUSE Listserv <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Date: Thursday, November 15, 2018 at 11:43 AM
To: EDUCAUSE Listserv <BLEND-ONLINE@LISTSERV.EDUCAUSE.EDU>
Subject: Re: [BLEND-ONLINE] Flexible Training/Learning Incubation Spaces

We launched our group, STELAR (St. Thomas E-Learning and Research), almost 2 years ago.  Part of that launch included a physical space that offers: Innovative individual and collaborative group study spaces for students, consultation spaces for faculty and our staff, meeting spaces, a Technology Showcase providing access to leading edge technology for faculty and students (VR/AR, AI, ML,) an Active Learning classroom space used for training and for faculty to experiment, and a video recording space for faculty to create course video objects using a Lightboard, touch Panel computer or just talking to the camera.

We’ve seen exceptional usage among our students for this space, likely in part because we partnered with our library to include our space along with the other learning resources for students in our main library.  We have had numerous faculty not only experiment with but then integrate VR/AR and other leading edge technologies in their classes and research projects.  Our classroom is busy consistently for training, class sessions, meetings, etc. and our learning spaces see student use throughout the day and into the evening.  In short, our physical space has become an essential and highly visible part of the work we do around providing opportunities, expertise, and technology for the innovation of teaching and learning (Our tagline: … at the intersection of Pedagogy and Technology)

The reception has been so positive that our space has been used as a model for some new student-focus collaboration spaces around campus.

We have a good deal of information about STELAR as a team on our website: https://www.stthomas.edu/stelar/

It does include some information about our physical space but we’ve also pared that down since our launch.  I’d be happy to connect you with our team if you’d like to learn more about what we’ve done here, where we’ve seen success and ideas that didn’t pan out as we expected.

John Kinsella
Instructional Systems Consultant

ITS – STELAR: St. Thomas E-Learning and Research
(651) 962-7839
jrkinsella@stthomas.edu

24/7 Canvas Support: 1.877.704.2127 or Help button in Canvas course.
Other tech needs contact:Techdesk@stthomas.edu

Digital Learning Essentials: Students/faculty self-enroll here

MoreBlogOnline ShowcaseTrainings & Events, &  Online Teaching Certificate

data is the new oil in Industry 4.0

Why “data is the new oil” and what happens when energy meets Industry 4.0

By Nicholas Waller PUBLISHED 19:42 NOVEMBER 14, 2018

https://www.neweurope.eu/article/why-data-is-the-new-oil-and-what-happens-when-energy-meets-industry-4-0/

At the Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference (ADIPEC) this week, the UAE’s minister of state for Artificial Intelligence, Omar bin Sultan Al Olama, went so far as to declare that “Data is the new oil.”

according to Pulitzer Prize-winning author, economic historian and one of the world’s leading experts on the oil & gas sector; Daniel Yergin, there is now a “symbiosis” between energy producers and the new knowledge economy. The production of oil & gas and the generation of data are now, Yergin argues, “wholly inter-dependent”.

What does Oil & Gas 4.0 look like in practice?

the greater use of automation and collection of data has allowed an upsurge in the “de-manning” of oil & gas facilities

Thanks to a significant increase in the number of sensors being deployed across operations, companies can monitor what is happening in real time, which markedly improves safety levels.

in the competitive environment of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, no business can afford to be left behind by not investing in new technologies – so strategic discussions are important.

+++++++++++
more on big data in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=big+data

more on industry 4.0 in this IMS blog
https://blog.stcloudstate.edu/ims?s=industry

1 202 203 204 205 206 493