Fifty years ahead in education starts now!

In my last post of Nov. 15, 2011, I wrote about how education could look in fifty years time. The main ideas there were four:

• Education will be personalized according to talents and affinities for each student
• This personalization will take place through a defragmentation of the actual curricula
• This personalization will mean assigning different roles from those they have now to Universities, teachers and students
• All this is technically possible thanks to the Internet

Today I come across the great news of the new platform to be launched by MIT called MIT.x(http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesmarshallcrotty/2011/12/21/m-i-t-game-changer-free-online-education-for-all/)

It is not exactly my idea of how it will turn out to be, but I find in it a new paradigm that goes on the right direction:

1. students will be able to control which classes will be available on the system, and therefore will create a personalized education system
2. students may interact with other students in order to learn what they are being taught on their own
3. although M.I.T. will not give a degree, students able to show mastery of the subjects taught will receive an official certificate on completion. They will be charged an affordable amount for the credential

Some comments on this article say that online experience will never be better than face experience on a real campus. I think that is what we might be seeing now, but we are yet not able to really figure out how that will look in the future. What is certain is that online campus is different from offline campus. Whether that means students in the former are better prepared than students in the latter, is yet to be found. And even if it comes out that face classes are better than online, Knowledge Society will be richer nonetheless with both of them coexisting, since millions of people will have the choice of attending the best qualified classes with the best contents in the world. And clearly, online will be more cheap and affordable than the physical campus model.

I like it better that way. In time, I believe the system will evolve into a Business Model in which:

1. Professors will be able to upload their assignments Online, using methodologies such as the one Khan Academy is actually using or MIT is planning to use. Access may be for free or at a small charge, depending on the professor's fame and authory. They will be able to do it on their own or within a University platform, or as freelancers for more than one University. This will follow the same Business Model we are now having in e-books, with the author, the distributor and the reader each in its role, only this time the contents deal with learning. This could be labeled as "level 1" of the Busines Model of Graduate and Post-Graduate Education
2. Universities will be the "certifiers" of assignments taken, just as the Model proposed by M.I.T. is, therefore with an affordable charge. This could be labeled as "level 2" of the Business Model of Graduate and Post-Graduate Education. It does not mean an Academic Degree, but it will add to the curriculae of any professional, since in Knowledge Society learning will be a permanent task.
3. Universities will be able to give an Academic Degree for students that have several assignments certified as in level 2, according to criteria formulated both by Academy and Industry alike, according to the needs of the work market. This degrees will be paid for, but the final cost will be lower than today´s with the "tangible campus" Model
4. Universities will still have physical campus classes, if it proves to be better than virtual campus, at a higher cost. The education market will take care of that in the end

So I see more and better education for all, because all will have the opportunity to access the contents, methodologies, universities and professors of their choice, and bigger competition leads to better quality and lower prices. Plus, I foresee online platforms giving the service of managing accreditation certificates and making job matching according to each person. With this, the Knowledge Society will boost.

So, it may still be 50 years away to get there, but at least I think for sure that is where we are going.

Get ready

Alfredo Barriga

How will Education look like in 50 years' time?

Public Education was invented in the nineteenth century to produce the workforce needed by the industrial revolution, as brightly explained by Sir Ken Robinson:  

This model is no longer useful. As the Knowledge Society brings the Knowledge Economy, education must be able to help each person develop his or her particular talents and affinities, since talents produce knowledge, and knowledge is the resource. The education model based in standardized curricula and hierarchical learning methodology does not produce that each person develops its particular talents. I am afraid most people in the world actually do not work in what they like most and are most talented. And that, in terms of knowledge economy, is a monumental waste of resources.

The point is how can we generate an education model that can be personalized and yet scalable. Here’s a proposal.

Schools have two roles: instruction and formation. With instruction children learn things, with formation, they acquire habits and values. Learning is actually what gets the bigger part of the time spent at school. Habits and values are considered to be a consequence of learning. Why do we name “hard skills” those that come from instruction and “soft skills” those that come from values, if it is not that we praise more instruction than values? And, no time is spent at school in acknowledging the talents and affinities of each child.

The Internet is increasingly allowing instruction to be self-done.  Sugata Mitra has exprienced with children who teach each other using Online contents (http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/en/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_education.html) . Roger Schank has experienced with "learning by doing online" (MBA Online, La Salle at http://www.beslasalle.net/portal/masters/masters-mba-mbaol-online).  Salman Khan (The Khan Academy, www.khanacademy.org/) has introduced an interesting new paradigm called “flipping the classroom”. Children in classrooms are instructed by the teacher and do homework at home. Khan makes it the other way.

The methodology consists in making students get instructed at home through the Web, with lessons uploaded to YouTube. This allows students to “rewind and play” the lesson as many times as they want, until they get it. Or, to comment with other fellow students through social networking until they get it. In the classroom is where “homework”, that is, the repeated application of the concepts learned, happens with a one-to-one computer approach. The teacher monitorizes who is doing well and who is not, and makes the advantageous student help the handicapped one. Plus, there is team work to discuss matters and present conclusions. This makes students learn, think, and apply what they learned. And get used to work as a team.

I think with this approach you don´t need classes to be as long as they are now, liberating time that can be devoted to the “soft skills” part. This is where the teacher becomes a mentor rather than a teacher, helping each student to discover his or her talents and affinities. With the information raised from flipping the classroom, each student can be guided to those subjects more related to his or her affinities and talents. With this, the students in most classes will share talent and affinity, making the class something thrilling and challenging to both students and teacher. Mentoring then can be specialized by affinities, with teachers related to the subjects where affinity is shared by the students, making creativity part of the methodology of teaching.

This will help students when confronting what professional career they want to follow.

In Knowledge Society professional training will become an ongoing activity. But, instead of packaging knowledge under a college or post graduate degree, the student will be able to choose what subjects he or she should follow in order to better develop talents and affinities. Universities will provide accreditation of subjects. A personalized curriculum will be able to be made by each person, structured and poured in job searching engines, making it possible to match jobs, talents and affinities. Therefore, jobs will be given to people most talented and related to the soft and hard skills needed for the job, in a worldwide job market searching for specific knowledge jobs.

With the “flipping the classroom” paradigm, the fragmentation of college and the universal access to the Internet, students will be able to attend classes anywhere in the world (limited only by language, which can also be learned Online), making education more competitive, innovative and cheaper.

I think that in 50 years' time the way people are educated, search for a job and develop their professional career will be totally changed. Less and less people will have a permanent job in an organization. More opportunities – and more uncertainty – will be available as the Knowledge Society and the Knowledge Economy evolves, focusing in intangible assets rather than tangible ones.

It took a lot of guts to our forefathers to produce and make possible the Public Education paid by with taxation to educate a huge amount of people which, up to then, had no access to education. It will also require a lot of guts to change the actual paradigms which are no longer suitable for the present Society and Economy, due to the fear of uncertain results and the lobby that will be raised by incumbent members of the Education sector which might see a threat in the new order of things. But that is just what happened two hundred years ago when Public Education came to place.

The bottom line is that the new paradigm will have to fulfill the needs of Knowledge Society, that is, that each person may work where he or she is most talented and likes best working at. Only then will knowledge create the maximum value it may reach, since knowledge is the product of people interacting with other people, with nature and with things created by people.

Alfredo Barriga

El debate faltante sobre la educación del S XXI

La educación pública se inventó en el S XIX, y fue funcional a la revolución industrial y a la Sociedad Industrial, como explica con mucha claridad Sir Ken Robinson 

Este modelo no sirve para la Sociedad del Conocimiento que está comenzando. Al ser el conocimiento un recurso económico, la economía del conocimiento requiere, para desarrollar su potencial, que las personas puedan trabajar en lo que tienen más talento y afinidad, ya que son las personas quienes generan el conocimiento. El modelo educativo basado en mallas curriculares estándar y metodologías jerarquizadas de aprendizaje no permite que el talento de cada uno florezca en el ambiente educativo. Muchos lo consiguen, pero otros tantos – me temo que la mayoría - viven frustrados de no poder trabajar en lo que más les gusta y en lo que se sienten más dotados. Es un descomunal  desperdicio de talento que supone un desperdicio peor de recursos.

El punto es cómo generar un sistema educativo que sea a la vez personalizado y escalable. Es lo que no nos dice Sir Ken Robinson en sus planteamientos. Aquí va una propuesta.

Los colegios tienen una doble función: docente y formativa. Los niños van a clases a aprender y a formarse. Sin embargo, el sistema actual requiere que la mayor parte del tiempo se dedique a la instrucción, y la formación es parte de la misma, casi como un subproducto. Internet permite cada vez más que la parte docente sea una auto-instrucción.

Salman Khan (The Khan Academy, www.khanacademy.org/) ha introducido un interesante paradigma denominado “flipping the classroom” (intercambiando la clase). Su metodología de enseñanza le ha permitido que la instrucción sea realizada por el alumno por su cuenta (clases vía YouTube), y “las tareas” sea lo que se haga en clases. Ello permite, usando tecnología, saber qué alumnos han avanzado más y quienes menos. A través de tecnología, se ayuda a los que van más atrasados con el apoyo de los que van más adelantados. El resultado es que no se requieren clases de más de media hora, y los alumnos aprenden y aplican lo aprendido continuamente.

¿Qué se hace con el resto del tiempo? Aquí viene la parte formativa. Veo en el futuro a los profesores en un rol 50% de mentor y 50% docente. Su función es ayudar a que cada alumno pueda descubrir sus talentos naturales y desarrollarlos dentro y fuera del colegio. Con la información generada por el paradigma “flipping the classroom” se puede definir cuales asignaturas son las que cada alumno debe desarrollar más – al estar en el centro de su talento y su afinidad – y cuales puede tomarlas a título de “conocimiento general”. Los alumnos no estarían por lo tanto en un curso (o sea, un grupo heterogéneo de alumnos que comparten aula a lo largo de toda su docencia) sino que en aquéllas clases que realmente los potencian. Al estar con compañeros que comparten sus afinidades, la clase entera se potencia. Los profesores, según sus propios talentos y afinidades, pueden ayudar así a aquéllos alumnos que mejor pueden apoyar y descubrir su talento. Eso crea un entorno estimulante para la creatividad de alumnos y profesores, dejando a los primeros mejor preparados para el mundo en que les tocará vivir.

Al pasar a la Universidad o Centro Técnico, el paradigma continúa. Definidas las afinidades y talentos, las Universidades pueden ofrecer a todos una primera etapa (dos años) en la cual los alumnos toman asignaturas que le son más afines, independiente de cual carrera quieran seguir. Los dos años siguientes, se especializan, para obtener un título de pregrado. Un año más para posgrado, y otro para para doctorado.

En la Sociedad del Conocimiento la formación profesional será una actividad continua. Ahí las Universidades y Centros Técnicos cumplirían el mismo rol que hoy ofrecen con los diplomados y posgrados ejecutivos, pero en vez de “envasarlos”, agrupando asignaturas para la obtención de un título, permitirán que cada alumno elija las asignaturas que le interesen, quedando acreditado en esa asignatura concreta dada por un profesor concreto, en vez de un diplomado que, en la práctica, no dice mucho sobre qué ha aprendido.

El Massachussets Institute of Technology (MIT) inventó hace años el concepto de “OpenCourseWare”, por el cual cualquier persona tiene acceso al material usado en asignaturas impartidas en esa prestigiosa Universidad y otras de gran renombre. El Modelo no se desarrolló porque no había Modelo de Negocios detrás. Lo que se propone arriba se lo daría: las personas pagarían a la Universidad por acreditarse en los cursos de su interés a cuyo material acceden gratis, lo cual pasa por algún tipo de interrelación con el profesor que imparte la materia, que también cobra por ello. Así todos ganan, y cada persona puede especializarse en materias concretas que tienen que ver con sus talentos y afinidades, mejorando su currículum.

Internet está permitiendo que cualquiera pueda “ir a clases” en cualquier lugar del mundo. También está permitiendo que cualquier empleador pueda buscar personas con conocimientos muy concretos para trabajos muy concretos, y que personas de un país puedan trabajar para empresas de cualquier país. El paradigma de que las personas trabajan en un puesto fijo en una empresa está dando paso a uno nuevo por el cual las personas trabajan para varias empresas en materias en las que son más talentosas y afines, generando independencia económica y mejor control de la carrera profesional, aunque sea a costa de mayor incertidumbre. No van a tener alternativa, según la Sociedad del Conocimiento se desarrolle, y se requiera cada vez más de trabajos muy especializados que no justifican contratar en planta a una persona.

De esta forma pienso que se desarrollará la educación que se requiere para la Sociedad del Conocimiento y para la Economía del Conocimiento. En 30 años más, la forma que las personas se educan, buscan trabajo y desarrollan su carrera profesional habrá cambiado totalmente. Habrá más incertidumbre pero también más oportunidades. Las nuevas generaciones sabrán que, en un mercado globalizado de 7 mil millones de personas, no necesitarán de un puesto de trabajo fijo, sino que podrán dedicarse a lo que más les gusta y más talento tienen, porque en ese mundo tan grande siempre tendrán trabajo, que no es lo mismo que tener "pega". Y al trabajar en lo que más les gusta, serán más productivos y tendrán mayor bienestar.

Todo lo anterior hace de la actual discusión sobre modelo de educación algo cortoplacista, que no va a preparar mejor a los niños que hoy se incorporan a la educación en prekinder y en 20 años más buscarán trabajo.

Alfredo Barriga

La era de Acuario

Las eras no se  miden en cientos de años, sino en miles de años. ¿Qué está ocurriendo tan extraordinario en este tiempo que no haya ocurrido en miles de años? La respuesta me llegó como un flash durante la conferencia de alto nivel de la OCDE sobre el Futuro de la Economía de Internet.

Allí estaban quienes comenzaron todo esto. Tim Berners-Lee, Vint Cerf, la plana mayor de la 3WC, las principales ONG de Internet. Y Ministros de 8 naciones. No recuerdo de quién vino la frase, pero me hizo “clic”: Internet tiene hoy 2 mil millones de personas conectadas, y han pasado todas las cosas magníficas que conocemos. Pero la verdadera Internet no la va a definir los 2 mil millones que hoy están, sino los 5 mil millones que aún no están.

La raza humana es social: su evolución y su desarrollo dependen de que puedan hacer cosas en equipo. Para eso, necesitan comunicarse. Y bajo ese paradigma, la humanidad ha tenido solo dos eras. Ahora comienza la tercera.

El primer gran invento de la humanidad para trabajar en equipo fue el lenguaje. Sin él, nadie puede comunicarse con nadie. Somos, como dijo Kevin Kelly, totalmente codependientes del alfabeto. Pero con el lenguaje solo las posibilidades eran muy limitadas. Una persona hablaba a otra persona, o a la tribu. Para pasar el mensaje se requería de otra persona que llevara el mismo a otra tribu o parte. El lenguaje se originó alrededor del año 10.000 antes de Cristo.

Luego vino la invención de la escritura, alrededor de 5.000 años antes de Cristo. Con ella, la comunicación adquirió una nueva dimensión: la conservación, y con ello, su prolongación en el tiempo y el espacio. Lo que se escribía quedaba a disposición de quienes lo leyeran, aunque se encontraran muy lejos, y aunque lo leyeran mucho tiempo después. Se necesitaron más de 6.500 años más hasta la invención de la imprenta para que la escritura pudiera ser masificada, y casi 450 años más para que un 30% del mundo supiera leer y escribir. Pero la escritura permitió la comunicación uno-a-muchos (libros y documentos) y uno-a-uno (correo) de una forma que no era posible con el solo lenguaje. El aceleramiento del desarrollo de la humanidad fue a la par de la masificación de la escritura y la alfabetización del mundo. Y es que, mientras más se pueden comunicar, mayor es el valor que pueden crear.

La tercera invención de la humanidad en este contexto es Internet. Permite una comunicación uno-a-uno, uno-a-muchos y muchos-a-muchos. Permite compartir información de forma instantánea por personas de todo el mundo, y trabajar coordinadamente en procesos que generan valor. La ley de redes de Metcalfe, que fue postulada para redes de telecomunicaciones es aplicable a las comunicaciones en general en la medida en que las telecomunicaciones se convierten en la forma de comunicación más utilizada, y eso viene de la mano de Internet.

No tenemos ni una clave de cómo podrá ser el mundo cuando – al igual que hoy sucede con la escritura – la inmensa mayoría de las personas usen Internet. Cuando tengamos 5 mil, 6 mil, 7 mil millones de personas interactuando, colaborando, coordinándose, generando valor a lo largo de todo el mundo. Una apuesta es que llegaremos a la creación de un metalenguaje común, ya  que todos nos comunicaremos con todos. Con la implementación del nuevo protocolo de Internet, la IPv6 – que permitirá a todas las cosas estar comunicadas entre sí y con las personas – las posibilidades son infinitas comparadas a como se ven hoy.

El gran beneficiario de esto será la humanidad, las personas. Ello, porque durante milenios los hombres no han visto a los demás hombres como generadores de valor sino que como competidores por los recursos donde se ha pensado que estaba el verdadero valor: recursos naturales y recursos financieros. Internet ha puesto el foco en las personas como generadoras de valor por encima de los recursos naturales, trayéndonos la Sociedad del Conocimiento. Durante milenios los hombres han esclavizado a otros hombres, atribuyéndoles valor solo como mano de obra barata. La Sociedad del Conocimiento cambiará esta noción para siempre. La dignidad de la persona y la dignidad de su trabajo se verán realzadas por ser la fuente primigenia de creación de valor y bienestar, por encima de lo que, durante milenios, hemos valorado más: los recursos naturales. La productividad de las naciones – si es que existen como las conocemos hoy en día – dependerá de conseguir que cada persona trabaje en lo que tiene más talento y más le gusta. Y solo por eso, será un mundo mucho mejor que el actual.

Alfredo Barriga

The Age of Aquarius

What would the World look like if everyone in the Planet could work where they are most talented? How bigger the Gross Domestic Product would be? How happier would people be? What would quality of life look like as compared to the actual reality? I have no measurable answer for any of those questions. What I am certain of is that it would be a lot bigger, a lot happier and a lot better than now. It is one of those “truths that are hold to be self-evident”, as Thomas Jefferson quoted.

During thousands of years humanity has been focused on the wealth that arises from the environment – physical resources – or whatever visible goods and means of production it has been able to create. Now we are coming to see that the real value creation is inside people themselves, in what looks not visible: creativity - the ability to think, understand, and come up with something different. 

That knowledge in itself becomes not only a resource, but the resource, as Peter Drucker states in his book “The Post Capitalist Society”, is driving and will continue to drive the focus of humankind from visible resources to invisible resources. If all the potential talent existing at one moment in the World could be unraveled and put to work at its best, in a global, networked, and collaborative basis, creativity, innovation and value creation would boost. We have no idea what that would look like, but undeniably it would be a lot better than what we have now. Networked and global collaboration would also constitute a driver for peaceful relations, since everyone would see clear that all are codependent from one another for the benefit of each. It is Nash’s equilibrium but in a “coompetitive environment” – one where competition and collaboration go hand in hand for a win/win relationship. It is Metcalfe’s Networks Law, but applied to Society instead of telecommunications.

The fact that knowledge is the leading resource must change the focus of all public, corporative or organizational policies, since knowledge comes from people, well trained, well motivated and working where they are most talented - something that Sir Ken Robinson calls “the element”.  Under these circumstances, the greatest waste of resources in the world is the huge amount of talent in stock that is not being used, be it because people do not work where they are best talented, or be it because they are poor and have no opportunities to educate themselves properly. Poverty becomes not only an injustice, but a measure of economic stupidity. All that talent not being put to work are cuatrillions of dollars kept under the pillow.

This new age needs a new education model. What Sir Ken Robinson contents is right: the actual public education model throughout the world is a creation of the enlightment to serve the needs of the industrial revolution. It is inadequate for the Knowledge Society. It will never be able to produce this change of paradigm where everyone is able to develop all the received talents. The technological platform to make that change is available. But there is a big resilience worldwide to make the change. It has worked during more than two hundred years; too many people live of it and by it, and the new paradigms, though clear regarding the “what” are not so clear regarding the “how”. Yet, it must be remembered that it was the same thing when public education came to life.

Knowledge Business, Knowledge economy and Knowledge politics are emerging. There is a worldwide feeling that “something big is going on”.

The Internet economy is thriving: it is growing continuously at two digits every year at a far bigger rate than any emerging economy; it is creating 2.6 new jobs for each one it destroys; it is moving over 8 trillion dollars a year in commerce; it is boosting exports in SMEs. Forty years ago, free trade was an economic theory, but one contested. Half the world relied in central, governmental planning. Today free market is champion. Only, it does not deliver accordingly to what theory says, hence the big financial troubles we are seeing, and the need for more regulations. But inside the Internet economy, it does work: equal opportunities, equal and symmetric information, low barriers of entrance and exit, free concurrence, free trade, and free stuff (doesn´t happen offline) competing with paid for stuff, no monopolies (once you are in: there are, unfortunately, monopolies for access to the Web in many countries)... and no regulations – aside those that deal with cybercrime. That environment has produced the biggest innovation tide ever seen, the fastest market capitalization ever recorded, the most globalized small business expansion ever known of.

The role of the State is being put to test, which is logical, given that the actual role is also a product of the enligthment and the industrial revolution. The global community emerging from the Knowledge Society and the value creation of invisible means of production available throughout the world as if they physically were present in the same place is surpassing the very concept of Nation State that emerged with the upcoming of democracy and industrial revolution.

Knowledge Society is being built by a number of knowledgeable people – especially in Information and Communications Technologies. But most of all, it is being built by the people who use the Web. Unlike other prior revolutions, this one is top-down in its creation but down-top in its development. It is as if the Net had a will of its own, different from the will of each of the people involved in it. Things happen fast and transcend people, nations, races, gender.

I know this is like reinventing or reengineering humanity. Perhaps too big a task, but that is what a new age is about. Knowledge Society and the Internet are making it possible. The ten flatteners and the three convergences that Thomas Friedman speaks of in his book are making it possible. Two billion people are connected now, and all and each one of them has access to practically the same contents, tools and platforms. The power that can be released actually in this environment is paramount. And if the five billion people who are not actually in the Internet had access to it, the consequences would be immeasurable

World leaders must acknowledge and understand the deep meaning of these changes. It is not economics 2.0, or politics 2.0: its humanity 2.0. That is why I believe it is a new age, the age of Aquarius. The faster these ideas are put to work, the sooner its benefits will come to all humankind.

Alfredo Barriga
Past Secretary for Digital Development, Chile