All or Something?

Most supporters of progress tend to fall into one of two main camps. In one camp, you'll find the group that believes that progress needs to be dramatic and wholesale, revolutionary. In the other camp, you'll find the group that believes in incrementalism, the idea that change should happen in small steps over a necessarily lengthy period of time, evolutionary.

The same is true in the world of customized learning. There are those seek revolutionary, structural change. Most of these folks see the need for a complete restructuring of the way public education works - no grade levels, flexible scheduling, and schools that don't look, sound, work the way they do today. There are also those who seek incremental change at the school or classroom level. Most of these folks accept the practical need for maintaining some if not all of the policies and procedures that exist in today's schools, largely for administrative convenience.

What makes this a great debate is that both camps are correct. (Isn't that always the case?) There is a need to completely restructure the way American public schools and school systems do business. The American approach to school is simply not up to the task of 21st century education despite the heroic efforts of those who work in the field. On the other hand, successfully implementing such dramatic change is likely impractical due to the required micromanagement from state Departments of Education and fragmented interpretations/approaches at the local level. Seems like a no win situation.

However, what we may have here instead is a no lose situation. Revolutionary change toward customized learning (what I would refer to as mass customized learning) is a worthy goal which can move the effort forward without requiring the immediate, wholesale changes that could potentially lead to educational anarchy. Meanwhile, there's no excuse for schools, or at very least teachers, to not take smaller, immediate steps toward greater customization. This is doable and is reasonable to require of current educators. I know this because my classroom features many of these steps already, despite being  just a year into customized learning implementation. (To learn more about this, read some of my earlier posts.)

While that progress alone is worthwhile, another product would perhaps be even more significant. Requiring incremental progress toward customization with the ultimate goal of mass customization could bring a critical mass of educational stakeholders on board the customization train. While not every teacher is willing to do everything, every teacher should be able to do something. The key to this is one of the necessary producers of motivation. People (not just students here, but teachers as well) are more likely to engage in a task if they feel that it is attainable. Mass customization may be too much to ask from most educators in the short term. However, smaller scale customization is reasonable to ask for  and results in the intrinsic rewards that come with a job being well done. I am in a unique position to make this claim as I have found that my move toward customized learning has resulted in a more positive teaching experience. Despite the shortcomings that plague me and the rest of us mortals, I feel like I'm doing more good than was possible before. I give much of the credit to the change of approach at the classroom level.

Therefore, I would suggest that there's room for both camps under the big tent of customized learning. Mass customized learning is a worthwhile goal; incremental customization is a worthwhile immediate measure. By recognizing the value of both camps, the entire conversation is shifted from the moot question of "Should we do this?" to the more progressive, "How should we do this?"

Who Benefits?

In a conversation the other day, I was asked to share my thoughts about the impact of a customized learning approach on different groups of students. After further reflection, I have identified the following groups.

• Students With Learning Disabilities: This is one group that has benefited mightily from a customized approach. One reason for this is that a customized program emphasizes what a student has done and can do rather than what they can't yet do. In this growth model, students are more accepted in all their limitations and perfections, as long as they are learning. This creates a more positive atmosphere for many students with learning disabilities, in part, because there are so many things that students with LDs can do, and in many cases, do well. The customized approach provides what these students need in order to be successful on a regular, and surprisingly independent basis. The resulting, more positive atmosphere lends itself to more effective teaching and learning and a dramatic reduction in behavioral issues. Students with LDs also benefit from a radical shift in how they are taught. These students are no longer merely trying to survive a class (with modifications built in to help them do only that), but they are actually receiving instruction that is targeted to meet their unique needs. In a customized classroom, students and teachers are free to step away from the common Learning Targets to focus on specific areas of need. This is a huge step at the middle school level, where it becomes increasingly difficult for teachers to provide more elementary based instruction in fluency and basic reading skills. In a customized classroom, the student isn't missing a thing if he/she steps away for these interventions. For these students, a customized approach has been a game changer.

• Traditionally Higher Achieving Students: This group has benefited from the customized approach, but there is still a piece of the puzzle that is missing for some of these students. These students would have done well even in a traditional classroom setting, and they are doing well in the customized setting. The first major benefit for this group is that they can move on once they have met a Learning Target rather than having to wait for the other students to catch up with them. This allows these students the freedom to learn a greater quantity of content. Indeed, I have students who are on pace to at least meet the middle school Learning Targets, which will open the door to more advanced (high school based?) learning. I've seen positive behavioral effects from this group, in part, because they no longer find themselves being bored or doing meaningless work. The second major benefit for this group is the option to take their learning to the highest of levels. The sky is the limit. They can attempt tasks that their peers may never be able to reach. Unfortunately, an option for learning at the highest levels doesn't always lead to students taking advantage of the opportunity. Too often, I've witnessed these students be satisfied with merely meeting a Learning Target that they are likely able to exceed. How to push them? That's a tough one. It seems unfair to require them to attempt the almighty "4" but a waste to allow them to pass on the chance. Giving me some comfort, one high achieving student told me the other day that he wanted to move on to more learning, but that he might return later to "shoot for the 4". That seems reasonable, and is much more realistic in a customized program. Still this group clearly benefits, just to a lesser degree, from a customized approach.

• Traditionally Lower Achieving Students: In some ways, this group is like the students with learning disabilities. Indeed, many students in this group do have LDs. However, not all of them do, nor are all students with LDs lower achieving. Along with the LD group, this group benefits the most from a customized approach. For many of these students, this is the first time in years that they have been actively engaging in meaningful academic tasks. Customized supports allow these students to tackle grade level content using appropriately leveled readings and tasks. The growth among this group has been astounding, and I am eager to see how that translates on district and state assessments. Even if the scores don't translate well to norm referenced tests (they may or may not), the pool of evidence indicates that students in this group have benefited the most from a customized approach. Interestingly, I have heard many reports from parents and the students themselves, claiming to enjoy school like they never have before. That is a direct result of a customized approach.

• Traditionally Middle Achieving Students: This group is in the middle, yet again, when it comes to the benefits of customized learning. While I haven't seen the astounding engagement, growth, and joy of the traditionally lowest achievers, this group has been holding their own. The difference is that success has not always been out of reach for many of these students. Many of these students learned how to "do school" over the years, and did just fine. These students continue to do fine as enough elements of the traditional approach remain for them not feel out of their element. To better grasp how customized learning impacts this group, one really needs to break it into subgroups that are constantly changing. As one might expect, these students are not of average ability in all that they do. Therefore, they do reap the benefits of their lower and higher achieving peers on more of a task by task basis. They also face the challenges faced mostly by their higher achieving neighbors. This group is benefiting, and I prefer to think of them as not a group at all. Rather, they are an area of overlap between the higher and lower achieving students, playing each role as required.

• Boys, Girls, Cultural Groups, and Learners of Various Learning Styles: I have witnessed few significant differences based on any of these factors. I suspect this is in part based on the variability built into a customized approach. Let's face it; everyone is unique, so a customized approach benefits all of these groups by offering targeted approaches to learning. Perhaps one area where there is some difference now, but only temporarily, is the realm of interest. Being in its early stages of development, the pool of readings and activities that are built into the program are still a bit limited. Ideally, the day will come when students are able to choose readings and tasks from a larger pool of appropriate selections. It is a fact that more boys in my classes are interested in sports and cars. It is also a fact that more girls in my classes are interested in horses and fashion. In the future it will be important for the program to feature readings and activities related to both areas of interests in order to offer interesting instructional content and opportunities for students to step outside of the traditional, sometimes stereotypical cultural expectations.