In fact, in reference to Edwards query, I think that in likely 50% of the cases around the globe--and much more-so in many lands--most teachers-to-be enter their training with hopes of modifying and doing a better job as their peers or in some cases to attempt to match their favorite teachers in the field. In some teacher training programs, some of this idealism is weeded out but in other cases, some teacher training programs add a great new spin on the fallow ground that promotes change and reform.

It is in when one is placed in the old shoe (1) of schools, (2) in school systems, and (3) in school or college cultures where the teacher becomes a victim or in some cases a victimizer or perpetrator in a system of education. The forces for this redirection in a larger system involve financial, social, cultural, and other pressures which spin the dreams of the novice in all undesired and in many cases system destructive directions. Institutions thrive but individuals--teacher, administrators, and students founder.

In the example, I noted (above) concerning the need for more experiential learning, I would include the essential requirement that administrators and leaders in the field get back to the floor regularly (and are required to do so--with a thoughtful reflective essay required of each one). It is the failure of institutional leaders to get into the shoes of the teachers and the students, that leads to institutional nausea rather than positive institutional development over time.

My experimential learning credit at the college level--which has empowered me to teach and work in over ten countries--included the following type of experiential coursework (By the way, I studied in a small liberal arts college in Kansas, USA) :

(1) Urban economics at the Urban Life Center in Chicago--one month

(2) International development in Nicaragua and Honduras --one month

(3) Rural Farm family and rural experience in France/Germany--one year

(4) Internship at KWCH TV in Wichita, Kansas-- one month

In addition, I took several language courses and did homestays in Spain and Mexico.

In every case, I had to keep a journal and write/submit a reflective paper at the end of my experiential learning.

Such methodology is neither new nor old--however--in a world that too often expects wind-up teachers to act in a certain way or in a world that has traditionally hoped that students learn in a certain manner, getting out of one's typically foot-wear and becoming the other is invigorating to every participant in the system.

Get the educators and administrators back to the floors of learning. Get the students out of the classroom and give them new tools and eyes to face the world.

Service learning and other forms of experiential learning need to fuel and refresh the educational delivery and process for all.

http://www.chicagocenter.org/

I think the fundamentals are still intact but there is an attempt to retool. There is also a lot of resistance to change - from thoughtful individuals and Luddites alike. The problem, as I see it, is that education looks around at technology that is being used in the social media and tries to import such concepts into education. Education institutions look at facebook and ask, 'How can we USE it?' and 'How can we be more cutting edge?' But such tools were not developed for education so attempting to use them always seems clunky and odd. Watching education trying to be modern is like watching a drunk auntie dance at a wedding.

Dear Jonathan Edwards,

Probably we should broaden the scope of this discussion to include others educational realities of different continents and economic and cultural areas.

In the European reality the epochal changes, as regards the conception of teaching and learning, are undoubtedly already occurred and now we are living of reflection.

However, thinking to Africa, South America, China, India, all this things seem to be differents . These parts of the world show a great potential for growth and of economic and social change, and even educational.

Doesn't seem only a matter of resistance to change on the part of the most advanced cultures, in the sense of the Western model, although at least partly it responds to true.

I believe, rather, that the new digital technologies are like oxygen for us, that helps this asphyxial educational planning to stay afloat.

I have the impression that the stagnation that we experience in educational thought is the same that we can find observing the approach adopted by the governments of the most industrialized countries in an attempt to handle the economic and cultural problems.

As I see it, institutional education entails/generates three fundamental problems:

1. The word „education“ stems from lat. e(x)-ducere, which means ‚to lead s.o. out of some (sinister) location’. In German (Erziehung; er- < ur- = ‚up’) it is ‚‚to draw s.o. (who is under/below oneself) up to the place, where the drawer/leader stands“. The problem is the standpoint of the leader/educator/teacher. The society is always anxious to reproduce itself by means of education, to reproduce itself with all its (funfamental) mistakes and queer beliefs and perceptions in the brains of their members. When I look back in the history of my country, Germany, the teachers at the beginning of the 20th century were enthusiastic subjects of the emperor and enthusiastically supported the World War I. After World War I the same teachers educated their pupils/students to hate democracy. The same teachers resp. their successors were enthusiastic subjects of Hitler and enthusiastically supported the World War II. After World War II the same teachers - concealed or ill-concealed - educated their pupils/students to be skeptical towards democracy, to admire the Hitler-Army and the German Autobahnen, and to trust in formal virtues instead of humanity and concrete contents which are good.

2. Children are eager to learn. Institutional education destroys this eagerness/desirousness. I don’t know exactly why, but it seems to be a matter of fact.

3. Institutional education forces teachers to answer – continuously - questions which the pupils/students didn’t ask. They call it curriculum. That may be the reason why the pupils/students forget what they „learned“. When they leave school, there remains only very few of sheer knowledge in their brains; most of the remaining knowledge and skills they learned during the first years of school education (some reading, calculating and writing). That means that institutional education is extremely ineffectual.

I think these 3 problems are inherent to institutional education.

Dear Klaus,

1. certainly, cultures represent the effort and the will to transmit on to succeeding generations the meaning and result of the common work, as history of a nation and of a population. In this we recognise the many problems related to social memory, historical traces and models of thought.

In this lies the endless dispute between those who believe as a priority the maintaining of tradition and who thinks it is essential the leave space to the change and renewal, and this in every field of human knowledge.

2. Every human being needs information and knowledge as well as needs to drink and eat. These aspects of the learning experience may be more noticeable during the age of development. In fact remain unchanged throughout the duration of our lives.The institutions sometimes lose touch with the real world needs and can suffocate instances of life and change.

It is another unsolved problem, attempting to reconcile impulses and desires,on the one hand, with the control of reason, the understanding in terms of ratiocination, on the other side.

3. Listening should be the basis of every educational relationship, both in asking questions how to find appropriate answers. Without forgetting the importance of silence and wait. Haste and superficiality they often feature the institutional inattention.

It has been claimed that there is now a generation--called Millenials--who are those who have grown up with modern media technology. For them, it is like the air they breath and have become accustomed too. It is claimed they will read less books but will master information gathering and be able to use.

My generation and other generations are seen as immigrants in this world. Do we need better acculturation to one anothers worlds? How?

We seem to be working in ever increasing abstractions -- empirical evidence is increasingly represented as "data", and the "Millenials" referred to by K. Stoda seem to be wrapping their senses in electronic hardware. Does this imply an evolutionary change of the sensory neural system, and thus, the present educational technology revolution is an indicator? Could computers have only come about because of something in homo sapien?

Every new generation has 'new' way of doing things (usually perceived as a 'better' way) and this leaves the older generation slightly outside of the zeitgeist. But I don't see this as evolutionary changes as it is too quick - it is mere fashion and human desire for challenge and improvement. Whatever cutting edge technology we use today will soon seem old-fashioned (like butter churns, record-players and floppy discs) - because the future hasn't been invented, we find it hard to imagine it - so we imagine ourselves as the end of history. Millenials will soon seem out of touch and a new generation will access information in a new set of ways. The question is, 'Is any of this fundamental change or is it merely sophistication?' I am inclined towards the latter. New ways don't destroy the old - they build on it. There is very little revolution in ideas. Change seems to be about gradual improvement (and fashion) and the reason it seems radical is only because the older generation are stuck with the ideas and technology of their time and are not part of the latest trend. The difference between an ebook and a book is functionality not content.

The ideas which could cause a revolution have been develloped since long time. The problem is to implement them to schools.

I think of what we call in German "lernerorientiert" or "schülerorientiert" (something like learner-centered, student-centered, pupil-centered, child-centered, student-friendly, child-orientated, targeted at pupils). Some call it "self-access". A new expression (since 1981) is "learner-autonomy". The idea is: Learning is an action the lerner does. No school, no teacher can do it. School and teacher can only help. But they can't help if the learner does not ask for help. There is no sense and no effect in answering a question which is not asked.

@ Klaus, I can see links to the work of Rousseau in lernerorientiert / learner autonomy. Which suggests that the revolution is not just about embracing the future but also using ideas from the past.

Some of Rousseaus ideas are still future. -

There are some more recent ideas, too, like Jean-Pol Martin's learning by teaching.

My question comes as a result of considering the development of long-distance learning and virtual worlds. The spoken, printed and illustrated word seem to have given way to blended forms in digital media. I tried a MOOC, and found that I was not prepared for the new experience -- admittedly, I am not a great multi-tasker, yet have heard that "a new generation" of students have the "skills". My father told the story of how, when he first encountered a radio, he thought there was someone inside it. Certainly, the capacity for imagination has not changed, but what about the capacity to learn? And thus, has teaching changed?

I think educational process has already changed in some areas. But looking at the educational realities among countries in the world, there are still countries with lower than 30% Literacy rate and the in the world its only about 85% literacy as to the whole population. These more than 700 million considered illiterates may have not experienced the basic educational process and how can we categorized them in the light of the above sophistication of learning process?

@ Mr. Blair I agree that the fundamental process is still there and that for me, in order for one to acquire knowledge it has to undergo this educational experience. As for me it has not changed much generally.

Experiential education is one of the fortes of my alma mater, Bethel College. I think that the experiential educational component needs to be integrated more thoroughly in classes in primary, secondary, and tertiary levels. However, teachers mus keep up to date on trends and be the best example of life-long learning in order to be most helpful and directive in further manufacture of education and educational experiences/evaluations-thereof.

The educational process has remained the same since the Industrial Revolution. Students are considered like ,say, bottles on the conveyor belt that are filled with liquid, checked ,corked up and packaged , exactly like a "batch" Industrial process. School has to change. There is no reason to-day ,when kids go in and out of the computer from the age of 5, everyone to learn exactly the same things as everyone else and there is no reason why two 14-year old should attend the same level class.

K. Stoda: I wonder if a survey of teacher college curricula would reveal an atmosphere of experimentation and initiative for future teachers? N.C. Markatos points out the manufacturing of a student -- is this how new teachers are still turned out? I would hope this is not the case -- here would be an indication of profound change in the educational process.

Please refer to some interesting articles for the work we try to do at the Royal Society of Arts ,London.

The coinage 'fundamental educational process' needs further clarification. What exactly is meant by it? At every historical periods there were different forms of formal and informal education. If historians like to see the historical developments as series of major or minor wars; then the intervening periods between two wars can be interpreted as 'preparatory periods' of war and very grossly speaking main thrust of the education was and still is- 'How to win the war?' Since the rules of war has changed, forms and contents of education must change. For example, patronage to research in pharmaceutical sciences in the tropical countries are mostly related to "Bio-piracy" orchestrated by big corporate houses and it has rightly been said that the next world war (if it happens) will be fought over "water"- that is, who controls the water resources of the world? Higher education and research in water-rich poor countries are naturally expecting drastic reformulation of educational policies.

Siddarta, I agree with you and would like to add s.th.:

Unintendedly we have already come - more or less - into the firing line of another world-war: The U.S.A. declared the war against terrorism, and fights with drone missile strikes and N.S.A., while putting the rest of the world outside the law. So education also should help the young people to live in times of this terrorism producing and therefore never-ending war. I fear the literacy rate does not improve the situation.

Thanks Klaus for your response. While responding to Jonathan's query I was trying merely to show that if the global political economy goes through certain fundamental changes, 'fundamental educational process' , whatever it might be, can not remain unaffected. In the present world, if a political space is too liberal to allow finance capital whatever it likes to do, the situation is called 'peaceful'; any resistance to that is termed as 'terrorism'. Moreover, war is the last resort of the recession prone time to breathe free. Thus, lots of experiments are going on to decentralize wars, increasing and spreading the 'low intensity wars' and call these situations 'peaceful'. Continuous war (quick destruction and rapid production of huge human and natural resources) is the only alternative left for the present form of market forces. If advanced management courses are principally directed towards equipping the intelligent minds to tune up accordingly, there are people who are also searching desperately the 'alternatives'. Thus, different possibilities are coming up.

Siddharta: All the people who built and build the world you describe are educated in schools following curricula. Shouldn't we claim: Stop education! Stop the curricula! Let the young generation find its way by themselves! Teach them some technical things, but don't educate them!

Klaus, I am afraid to say that the proposition you have forwarded is perhaps coming up from a deep sense of frustration. If good education is supposed to impart "good new values", you might be finding in increasing number in your surroundings, particularly among the youths, a serious lack of it. But that does not mean that the 'education' should be replaced with a 'tool box' (which of course, offers sometimes more relief than relentless pedagogy). Our personal experience suggests, unless new educators see 'education' as a means of activism, the omnipresent market forces engaging every inquisitive mind to the soap opera of the 'idiot box' can fundamentally change the basic pillars of value system and the genuine innovators might think of retreating, far from the maddening crowd, in perfect recluse somewhere. And, that will definitely be a huge loss for the prospect to change, the essential purpose of higher education.

Siddharta, I do hope you are right. And I would support everybody who thinks like you.

In fact, in reference to Edwards query, I think that in likely 50% of the cases around the globe--and much more-so in many lands--most teachers-to-be enter their training with hopes of modifying and doing a better job as their peers or in some cases to attempt to match their favorite teachers in the field. In some teacher training programs, some of this idealism is weeded out but in other cases, some teacher training programs add a great new spin on the fallow ground that promotes change and reform.

It is in when one is placed in the old shoe (1) of schools, (2) in school systems, and (3) in school or college cultures where the teacher becomes a victim or in some cases a victimizer or perpetrator in a system of education. The forces for this redirection in a larger system involve financial, social, cultural, and other pressures which spin the dreams of the novice in all undesired and in many cases system destructive directions. Institutions thrive but individuals--teacher, administrators, and students founder.

In the example, I noted (above) concerning the need for more experiential learning, I would include the essential requirement that administrators and leaders in the field get back to the floor regularly (and are required to do so--with a thoughtful reflective essay required of each one). It is the failure of institutional leaders to get into the shoes of the teachers and the students, that leads to institutional nausea rather than positive institutional development over time.

My experimential learning credit at the college level--which has empowered me to teach and work in over ten countries--included the following type of experiential coursework (By the way, I studied in a small liberal arts college in Kansas, USA) :

(1) Urban economics at the Urban Life Center in Chicago--one month

(2) International development in Nicaragua and Honduras --one month

(3) Rural Farm family and rural experience in France/Germany--one year

(4) Internship at KWCH TV in Wichita, Kansas-- one month

In addition, I took several language courses and did homestays in Spain and Mexico.

In every case, I had to keep a journal and write/submit a reflective paper at the end of my experiential learning.

Such methodology is neither new nor old--however--in a world that too often expects wind-up teachers to act in a certain way or in a world that has traditionally hoped that students learn in a certain manner, getting out of one's typically foot-wear and becoming the other is invigorating to every participant in the system.

Get the educators and administrators back to the floors of learning. Get the students out of the classroom and give them new tools and eyes to face the world.

Service learning and other forms of experiential learning need to fuel and refresh the educational delivery and process for all.

http://www.chicagocenter.org/

"Fundamental educational process"; by which, I mean that complex of elements that drive and are driven by, the human behaviors of curiosity and discovery leading to creation of artifacts -- abstract and concrete -- and the social transmission and retention of these artifacts of the process(es) in the service of perpetuating, culture and civilization, defined by society.

Is the impact of the Digital Age mere sophistication or actual redefinition of this?

Attachment to other departments to gain skills through participation in special project groups closely linked to the skill sets needed for the curriculum.