And it seems that the
21st Century Skills folk would lead us to believe that by quoting percentages (which are based on surveys) that the truth of the matter has been established.
I don't think so.
I stumbled across the 21st Century Skills folk back when
I was reading through Indiana's latest technology plan. I came across the group in a Google search, but I don't think the 21st Cent. Skills folk helped write the state's plan; perhaps the writer of the plan was influenced by group. (And, if we're to get picky: I don't think anyone owns the term "21st Century Skills"). Anyway, in my first post, I discussed a bit about the group and some of their founding principles. Now as more states join list of states jumping on the 21st Century Skills movement, I wonder how long it will take for Indiana to jump on board.
In a recent presentation to the National School Board Association, the Partnership (as I'll refer to the group known as Prince, I mean the Partnership for 21st Century Skills)
PowerPointed this summary, and in what I've read from the site, hits their common threads. Besides this slide which makes me go "Oh, and where are the educators on this page?" I find that the proof (sometimes called the data in an argument) is merely based on surveys. Yes, surveys.
First "proof" is based on the results of surveys published by the Partnership (with some help of other business organizations) in late 2006 under the title "
Are They Really Ready to Work?." These are survey results, people and should be treated as such. I understand the need to get a "feel" for what's out there, but if that is the sole basis of the argument of having these 21st Century Skills, then it is a faulty argument.
Don't get me wrong: I'm not advocating that the Partnership is out to control the world. But I do have to wonder what's in it for the businesses of the Partnership. Doing nice things for education is nice, but really, what's the payoff for industries where the bottom line and the shareholder option means a vacation or a pink-slip.
But schools can't and don't function that way; I can't merely give a survey to parents on how they think their child is doing in my class; I give an appropriate assessment to measure what the student knows. And this seems to be where things get messy, so we won't run down this trail this time. (Hint: Wouldn't it be great if we measured all students the same way so we can get an accurate measurement? NCLB isn't working great, is it?)
Anyway, let me get on to the next proof and that is a survey of "
Voter Attitudes Toward 21st Century Skills." I'm hoping you can see where this conversation is going (Hint: Exit polls and their accuracy). But again, these are limited questions that probably most people would agree with...but does the survey result "prove" the need or the existence of the Partnership? Oh, and by the way, here's how the poll was conducted:
the poll of 800 registered voters was conducted Sept. 10 to 12, 2007, by Public opinion Strategies and Peter D. Hart research Associates for the Partnership for 21st Century Skills.
My call, again, is for clear thinking on education and technology. The Partnership comes into this conversation because they want to help push educational reform through technology. Surveys can only reflect attitudes and shouldn't be used to make policy; policy should last longer than the current crisis (and this one is reflected in the last slide: "Are our students ready for the new global economy?".
Next time, let's take a look at the Partnerships new model for education (see this nice graphic: it's a rainbow and it's reflection).
