Learning to Be Free

In my family we read National Geographic. We’ve been subscribers for at least three decades. As a child I was deeply attracted to the incredible photos and stories of places I could hardly imagine existed. A yellow bus would take me and my elementary school mates to the library every other week. My first stop was the magazine rack, where I eagerly awaited each new yellow trimmed issue.

I drove by my school again this summer. Edison Elementary has become Nia Educational Charter School. Everything changes.

With that in mind I picked up the most recent National Geographic and read Bill McKibben’s article on carbon dioxide emissions and its effect on global temperatures. I was fascinated by the math and the creative way he used data to help the reader think about possible courses of action. It connected to something that is core to our proposal— the idea that the future is uncertain in part because we can influence it.

In his graph he showed the effects of various CO2 reduction strategies, and the consequences of doing nothing. I imagined that one could portray the gap between what we learn and do now with what we’ll need to know and do in the future to successfully mitigate the consequeces of CO2 emissions.

In conclusion McKibben writes:

In the end, global warming presents the greatest test we humans have yet faced. Are we ready to change, in dramatic and prolonged ways, in order to offer a workable future to subsequent generations and diverse forms of life? If we are, new technologies and new habits offer some promise. But only if we move quickly and decisively–and with a maturity we’ve rarely shown as a society or a species. It’s our coming-of-age moment, and there are no certainties or guarantees. Only a window of possibility, closing fast but still ajar enough to let in some hope.

http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/2007-10/carbon-crisis/carbon-crisis.html

I wonder how many things we can substitute for “global warming” in that paragraph and still have it ring true?

One of the key questions that we keep hearing from you and others concerns learner autonomy in the social and institutional architecture we are proposing. Parents especially often feel young people have too much autonomy already–they want to know what will guide or constrain an autonomous learner’s choices.

It is interesting that the idea of learner autonomy triggers so much attention while the other constraining principles we have proposed are rarely questioned. So, without writing a master’s thesis on the subject, let me see if I can clarify what we are proposing.

Think of an accomplished adult we know — lets call her Sara. She lives within a network of relationships with people, communities and institutions that she has created for herself. She has a job, a college degree perhaps—she likes hiking and camping, hip hop dance, and spoken word concerts. She has people that she loves and cares about, people that care about her in return. She volunteers as a mentor of a young girl, Carina, who is 11 and struggling in school.

Sara’s only contractual commitment is the only one that pays her money: her job. In every case, other her choices are guided by her goals and her pursuit of value (or meaning, which is another expression of value). Her commitments are voluntary. Her network has a structure that gives her power and access to what she needs–in her case it is a robust network that gives her a lot of choices and opportunities.

What constrains Sara’s choices and guides her behavior? In order to get what she needs or wants, Sara offers value in exchange for the value she receives — value of one kind or another. For example, mentoring Carina satisfies her deeply felt desire to make the world better somehow. Carina gets a powerful role model and advocate (and trips to interesting places) in exchange. Their interactions over time are shaped by these exchanges, creating a powerful relationship–it persists over time and can be accessed as needed. More importantly, the expectations that these two have of one another constrain the choices they make.

When Sara is invited to a party she declines because she has already committed to take Carina to a local dance event. Sara has a relationship with Carina’s teachers and her parents. When Carina thinks about skipping school with friends now, her strong bond with Sara–and the specter of Sara’s disappointment and the other people it would impact (transparency)—gives her strong motivation to make a different choice (internal accountability).

Before there were schools most children participated communities of value and practice to learn and develop. Apprenticeship was the dominant learning paradigm in most communities — learning a trade or how to be an adult by participating in multi-generational communities with rights of passage connected to demonstrations of the learner’s ability to produce value for others and take up the rights and responsibilities of a full community member. When we speak of the learner’s network, think of it as another way to describe a child’s nascent community. Now apply the design principles:

1. AUTONOMY increases the power of the learner
2. OPENNESS increases access to resources available
3. INTERNAL ACCOUNTABILITY increases the significance and impact of relationships
4. REAL-WORLD RELEVANCE authentically connects the learner to the real world
5. TRANSPARENCY allows learners to see available resources and evaluate potential exchanges with better information
6. CHOICE allows the learner to select resources aligned to her purpose and learning style

Think about how these principles together shape what a learner might chose or not chose to do with their autonomy.

So what guides or constrains the learner’s autonomy? You know the answer: the same things that guide or constrain yours, with one caveat: children need to be treated as apprentices who need appropriate challenges and supports as they become adults.

I think the most radical thing we are proposing is a new social structure for learning, and ultimately, new approaches to building learning communities that are interconnected and sustainable into adulthood.

Now its your turn–what would your vision be of these design principles in action? What do you believe would or should constrain learner autonomy?

Tomorrow is our vision workshop and I am very excited and a bit nervous. I have spoken in public hundreds of times and have been privileged to serve in leadership roles for nearly all of the forty years of my working life. Yet what we will come together to discuss tomorrow feels different—as if all of those forty years were preparation for this next and biggest challenge.

I thought I knew a lot, and then, suddenly, with the simple choice to work on a new approach to education, I didn’t know any of the things I needed and wanted to know. These last ten months of learning and creating have been like starting at the beginning again (and that’s a scary thing to do when you are almost 60).

I just want you to know that Katrina, Elizabeth, Ed and me—we all feel deep appreciation for the fact of your engagement. That so many are willing to come and be a part of such a venture is truly humbling, inspiring and definitely motivating. I’ll finish today’s message with a quote:

“In times of change, learners inherit the Earth, while the learned find themselves beautifully equipped to deal with a world that no longer exists.” Eric Hoffer (http://www.erichoffer.net/)

At the top of this blog you will see some header tabs. The resources tab is where we will keep a running list of books, articles, webpages, thinkers, etc. that we think are most relevant, helpful and interesting. If you have resources you would like to recommend for addition to this list, just respond with a comment to this post, and we’ll take a look. Thanks in advance for your suggestions.