What does “deeper learning” mean to you? – K12 Open Ed



I am joining Karen Fasimpaur for this deep learning MOOC dive starting in January and following (#dlmooc).  As ever, I selfishly look forward to the deep learning that follows in her wake.  Deep for me anyway.

One of the elements I hope to bring to this work is that of iconoclasm and idiosyncracy.  I think that if we are going to use the bamboorhizome‘depth’ metaphor (and I will tell you right now that I am deeply suspicious of it) that we must extend it to what satisfies our own unique intuition of what amounts to ‘deep’.  I suspect that it is all about a particular cognitive embodiment.

In other words, I want to ask and answer this question:  what does deep learning feel like.  If I can get a clearer sense of that, then I think the Hewlett Foundation’s deep learning principles will click into place.  As they are right now, they feel smooth and weightless in my mind’s pocket.  I want that deep learning to gain heft and texture as it rolls around in our connected minds.

I look … well,  I was going to say ‘forward to it’, but I am reminded that the Greeks of old had a very different notion of the future.  They thought of the past and present as being in front of them, the future behind them.  That feels pretty deep to me if logic is an example of deep learning.

12809705_295notyetclearWhat I mean is that even if  you can’t see the future, you can still feel it whistling up  behind you into the present and off into the past.  I trust that we will make something of this deep and windy Muse.

Daily Links 01/09/2014

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.

David Price’s Most Excellent Questions about the Future of Learning

Have schools been centered on the institutional and personal imperatives of educators and not learners?
How colleges and universities adapt to the customization and personalization of education will largely determine their survival.
Will higher education adapt to the challenge of customization/personalization? How will they do so? Is this the creative dislocation of our time?

Is the MOOC analogous to an mp3? Are they potentially as disruptive to higher ed as mp3’s were to the music industry?

Have schools had a monopoly on learning? Or have they had a monopoly on authenticating that learning?

Will this be for everyone or only for those who can be autodidacts? Are we all natural autodidacts?

Once students have learned to hack their own education, what will happen to traditional models of high school and higher education?


What is the purpose of schools in the ecosystem where it lives in a similar niche as social media? Do they provide a set of skilled employees for the labor market? Are they about developing the ‘whole’ child – emotionally, intellectually, creatively?
Here to serve to ensure national economic competitiveness? Are they about civic cohesion through cultural education?
Is it true that if we can’t agree on a purpose or purposes for school then we can’t possibly get where we want to go?

Addressing teachers in 2012, Heng Swee Keat, Singapore’s Minister for Education, argued for a radical shift in policy:

 “The educational paradigm of our parents’ generation, which emphasized the transmission of knowledge, is quickly being overtaken by a very different paradigm. This new concept of educational success focuses on the nurturing of key skills and competencies such as the ability to seek, to curate and to synthesize information; to create and innovate; to work in diverse cross-cultural teams; as well as to appreciate global issues within the local context.”
Is Singapore’s Minister of Education right? Is there a new paradigm today? Is he right that we need to teach competencies like seek/sense/share, creating and innovating, collaborating, and being a global citizen?

South Korea’s ex-minister for education Byong Man Ahn cast doubt on the usefulness of a high PISA ranking, despite Korean students ranking first in reading and maths, and third in science, in the 2009 PISA survey:

“While Korea‘s students excel at learning, they believe its purpose lies not in self-development based on personal interest or motivation, but in entrance into a highly ranked university. Students have no time to ponder the fundamental question of “What do I need to learn, and why?” They simply need to prepare for the test by learning the most-effective methods for digesting tremendous quantities of material and committing more to memory than others do.”

Is the PISA exam just another example of the quants gone amok? On tap or on top?