New places, spaces and tools are essential for the new life that our children will grow into. We can't keep educating for the past. However the tools of themselves will not create better results. We need to be doing the right things with the tools and places. Effective teaching is still key! Effective teaching is creative, focused, includes the learner in the goal setting and designing pathways to get there, but also provides scaffolds and support as needed. As our learners become more effective learners they will be able to take over more of the responsibility, but just throwing them some new tools and spaces to work will just lead to superficial, mediocre "stuff" done on computers. What we need is ignition, challenge, mentoring, collaboration, feedback and modelling of reflective, ongoing learning for all - including the teachers!

I'm surprised that no one has brought up the US Department of Education meta-analysis of June 2009 in which it was concluded that higher education programs that incorporate online learning tools are more effective than face-to-face/classroom-based learning only. The meta-analysis, which examined a 12 year period of learning, found the most beneficial being a blended learning program. You can read more about it here: http://blog.litmos.com/2009/07/online-learning-more-effective-than.html

The world has changed and our younger generations should have access to the new technology that's available for learning because the skills they will learn through using these tools will be relevant in their lives. When I went through school English grammar was no longer taught as it had been in my parents' day. I remember they were horrified, but really, was I disadvantaged by not being taught what a pro-noun and an adverb was as a kid? I went on to specialize in foreign languages, so I ended up learning it all anyway as part of learning a new language structure. I think the same will happen with the younger gens - do they still need to have such a focus on handwriting in schools? These kids will probably grow up using a keyboard of some sort in place of handwriting for the majority of their needs. If they go on to a career that requires hand writing documents, they will pick up that skill at the time.

link

That's one in probably a million articles about this sort of thing.

It is pretty conclusive (and I thought it had been for a long time) that different environments can have a positive influence on every thinking activity from learning, to memorization, to creativity.

I'm not 100% sure that the primary concern is whether or not specific teaching methods, tools, classroom layouts, etc work. I believe the primary concern is cost.

In a country where 30% of the population doesn't really know what Evolution is, can't name all 50 States, and can't name a single Supreme Court Justice,

new textbooks at this point may be a more realistic and helpful contribution.

But I'm for it! Let's get out of Iraq, raise taxes .001% and we can have the best schools in the world again... good luck.

New places, spaces and tools of learning produce better outcomes for learners through the process of learning. In our ever changing world it is essential that children see that learning is life long and that the best way to learn and cope with change is to develop the skills and dispositions that can be transferred across a range of new situations. Technology can provide a rich context for this learning, it be the tool for this learning and it can be the 'hook' for this learning. Engaged students learn and take ownership for their learning - they learn that learning is something that they do, not something that is done to them. Again, this needs to be cultivated by skilled teaching - but when these new places, spaces and tools are utilised by a teacher who has a sound understanding of 'learning ' I see a win-win for student learning and achievement

I think that when you look at a long time frame then it is hard to argue against this idea. Would today's learners be just as well served in a cave with some blank wall space and a burnt stick?

The more interesting part of the question for me is "how come we still have so many classrooms looking like what they did when I went to school - surely that's evidence in itself that what we're doing is working - or is it?" I think that society has found 30 students sitting at desks and receiving their education from one teacher at a time very convenient, and it has been a solution that has been seen to "work". But the reason it has worked and found a reasonably high level of acceptance is because schools have such a broad range of services, both formal and informal, that they provide to such a diverse group of clients. The status quo has been seen as an acceptable compromise I believe.

It certainly enhances learning for me, improves outcomes for my own learning. Faster, wider, deeper, richer, more diverse, more relevant, more detailed, linked and connected.

So (1) surely this should be possible for students in schools and (b) the most critical element is the learning how to learn, digital literacy, and students who see meaningful purpose to learning.

Look the world has changed. Can you imagine teaching without the internet or projectors or intranets? Hell the kids would wanter off on their iPhones and completely ignore us. New is crucial and does make a difference.