“Learning Pathways.”
Recently this image made the rounds on the internet, with a brief caption: “School.”
Schools are not prisons, but this image resonates with the age-old problem of school: how do we tailor our teaching to the unique needs of 20–30 students who are sitting in the same room? The imagery captures the frustration when we try to push the a unique life-in-formation through an often limited mold. Here’s a brief example:
In first grade, my father was already reading at a fifth grade level. To make sure he wasn’t bored in class, his teachers moved him into the fifth grade reading class. He loved the challenge of it and enjoyed the books they read. Unfortunately, because his school only went up to the fifth grade (and he wasn’t ready to skip ahead in all grades) he had no option but to stay in that fifth grade reading class as he went through grades 2, 3, 4, and 5 in his other courses. He was stuck for 5 years in the same class, even reading some books multiple times.
For a long time, unfortunate prison imagery has been associated with schools and for just as long, innovative educators have been trying to figure out how to de-institutionalize learning and customize it for each learner, recognizing that the formation of a life is unique and complex; it happens everywhere, beyond the boundaries of a single classroom, institution or building. Throughout most of history we’ve relied on the monolithic school out of necessity: how else do we deliver learning to so many students at once? We traded off customization for control, diversity for efficiency, and freedom for security. And, as a result, we’ve often created a culture limited by homogeneity, rather than inspired by possibility. Instead of successfully addressing the nuance and detail of each individual student, we deal with classes of them, and grades full of classes, and schools full of grades, and districts full of schools. Administering education on the school or district level provides us with a lot of power and control, but gives us less granularity concerning the unique needs of individuals. Also, note that this structure is completely linear, it is far from the rich structure of a network (a rhizomatic structure). Nurturing the individuality of students in our top-down school structures is often, unfortunately, like trying to paint the Sistine Chapel with a paint sprayer.
While I am generally skeptical of all instances in which technology claims to solve an ancient problem, I think that, in this case, the internet (and it’s capacity for data-rich networks) has something powerful to offer to the future of education. As with all technology, of course, it could be used to further dehumanize learning and merely improve efficiency or scale (as in the case of massive online-only courses). In this case, however, if used correctly it could be used to flatten the world.
By flatten, I mean the use of technology to re-order the relationship between the different parties in an exchange, in this case the learners and the teachers. Instead of requiring all learning to pass through a single institution and then back out to learners (The School as Institution: one-to-many), the complex networks and communication enabled by new technologies can allow learners to engage directly with a broad array of choices: formal and informal, digital and in-person.
Our learning—our development as humans—looks more like this:
or this:
than it does like this:
Our schools must go beyond this 1,2,3,4,5 structure and mature into a network of learning that looks and functions more like the networks of our knowledge and the network of our minds. Within this complexity, there is still room to emphasize essential elements or areas learning, but to see those essentials as connected to a wealth opportunities across disciplines, not isolated within silos.
While some schools do have a breadth of interesting experiences, they can never meet all of the unique interests of all of their students. But, with a city-wide learning network, this becomes possible. Single schools (or teachers) do not have to do everything for everyone, but can rely on the wealth of the community to offer experiences they do not provide. If a city-wide learning network (for discovering experiences) and digital badges (for proving accomplishments) are realized, students will be able to engage the breadth of their city’s resources. As students learn, their experiences within the network will point them to other experiences that excite their interests (the next steps on their path) and can connect back to their experiences at school.
In the past, the complex work required to allow all learners to personalize their learning path amidst a sea of opportunities was overwhelming. But now, by equipping collaborative communities with data-driven networks, diverse and personalized learning pathways are possible. We just have to build the network.
Of course, learning has always happened outside of the singular school a student attends, but now we have the chance, not only to recognize that learning, but to fully embrace it as a critical component of a learner’s pathway. We are on the brink of actually being able to do something we have talked about for a long time: use the City as the Campus. If we are able to network the wealth of learning opportunities citywide — traditional classes, service work, mentorship, workshops, meetups, etc. — we can enable learners to see their Schools not as the alpha and omega of their educational options, but as a home base for their life as a learner in Pittsburgh; to see learning not as something that happens within certain walls, on certain days and not in the summer, but as a lifelong pursuit that transcends space and time.
The city-wide learning network that makes this possible consists of the grand total of the connections, or “pathways” between opportunities. It’s always been the case that a student could go to an after-school arts program, or a weekend robot workshop, or a summer camp. But when we create connections between these, students (and their parents and teachers) can begin to see these opportunities as part of a meaningful learning path. A wealth of citywide pathways enables learning to expand beyond the school with legitimacy, making a rhizomatic, interest-driven, and diverse learning experiences possible.
This is why, at the end of the month, the Sprout Fund is holding an event that marks an important early step for the future of this city-wide learning network, the Learning Pathways Summit.
While it is easy to see “pathway” as just another piece of edu-speak jargon, I think, in this case it is an appropriate and powerful word. In using the word “pathway” we are recognizing the uniqueness of our students and the resources they need to follow their path, even if it is the one less travelled, even if their school does not offer it. In developing learning pathways, we are building the connections—the network—across the City that will enable students to pursue opportunities that are driven by passion and exploration, not by the limitations of their particular schools.
I have had the good fortune to be part of the discussion around this work for some time and recognize that our efforts in Pittsburgh are of international importance. Educators and funders in New York City, New Orleans, London, and beyond are interested in what happens in Pittsburgh. Due to our small size and the quality and creativity of our educators we have an exciting opportunity to act as a global leader in this work. If you are able, consider joining for the Learning Pathways summit on November 21st. We need your feedback in these early stages as we attempt to remake the structures of learning into something that goes beyond the 8–3 school day, beyond the 180 days, beyond grades, and classes, and districts. Come and help us to imagine Pittsburgh as a dynamic and interconnected City of Learning, where schools are a home base for education and learning extends and is counted throughout our lives.
