This was the second annual conference of the Global Villages Institute
(GVI)—an organization with sweeping vision, missionary zeal, and
powerful supporters.
GVI’s name and guiding principles come from Marshall McLuhan’s famous
statement that information technology would radically transform our
planet into a “global village” where old barriers of place and time
would rapidly shrink into insignificance. The aim of the conference was
to discuss ways in which new technologies and approaches to teaching
could be used to equip students for the information age. And, of course,
they came to discuss how old approaches to schooling would have to be
transformed to accommodate these changes.
Practical Homeschooling was there to take a close look at the latest
high-end technological developments. We also wanted to learn about what
new kinds of education these visionaries were proposing. Our bottom
line: “What do we see here that could be helpful, and what do we see
that could be harmful, to homeschoolers and the homeschooling movement?”
On the bright side, a lot of the technology presented had real merit.
For example, one well-attended presentation dealt with the Internet and
its AskERIC educational research service. This session explored ways
that students and teachers can delve into many topics with a depth and
impact impossible in traditional libraries and classrooms. The speaker
showed us how to gather information not only in “hard data” (book or
print) form, but also as sound and graphics, and on topics ranging from
raising pet hamsters to Matisse, the Great Books, and Mars exploration.
(And you thought you were on the cutting edge with your CD-ROM
encyclopedia!)
|
|
Chris Dede—Mr. Reality Check
|
The Educational Testing Service (ETS) presentation on computerized
student evaluation was also valuable. We looked at how computers were
being used for more convenient standardized testing. Consistent with the
theme of “technology transcending place and time” says ETS, test-takers
can now get almost instant feedback from tests taken in their own homes.
Yes—your child might soon be able to take standardized tests in his
pajamas! Great for all of you who must test regularly to meet state
guidelines . . . assuming the tests themselves do not become tests of
political orthodoxy, and that privacy concerns can be met.
But it went beyond this. We saw new computer testing programs being
developed that would allow true performance assessment—evaluating what a
student can actually do. These will make it possible for a student to
take tests using multiple ways to solve single problems; to solve
problems in teams; and to apply a range of academic disciplines to
tasks. The instructor can evaluate the choices the student makes and the
processes he uses. For homeschoolers, who usually seek knowledge beyond
rote memorization, and who engage in cross-disciplinary learning
projects, set up co-ops, and employ hands-on learning, the uses for this
technology are obvious.
And of course, there were lots of the latest gadgets: interactive
television, multi-media computers, networked schools, on-line
collaborative student projects, international e-mail pen pals, and so
on. There were “wonder academies,” such as ACT in McKinney, Texas, where
all students are given a notebook computer and phone jacks line the
walls, or Peakview Elementary School of Aurora, Colorado, where the
typical classroom has computers and video equipment, and parents,
teachers and students work together designing and implementing
cross-subject, often high-tech, projects. No wonder all those public
school teachers attending looked so dazed—most had never even heard of
most of this. It was common to here them referring to it, with a mixture
of suspicion and awe, as “zowie stuff.”
Many speakers emphasized that we need to readjust our philosophies,
attitudes, and methods to accommodate these new technologies.
Surprisingly, a lot said in this regard would please homeschoolers.
These “new” approaches included: transcending the limits of the
classroom; less age- and grade-segregation; emphasizing individual,
self-directed work; teachers as facilitators and co-explorers rather
than just as lecturers and drillers; the need for different techniques
for different individuals; the need for using a broader range of
approaches and technology for teaching given subjects; flexibility of
time and place; the centrality of parental involvement; and making
parents co-learners as well as teachers.
Homeschoolers could really use some of the suggestions made at the
conference. For example, many pointed out that, to gain the benefits of
educational computing, users need resource centers and tech support.
There’s no reason why regional homeschool associations and sympathetic
churches couldn’t make a creative effort to provide such support. (“Hi!
I’m the Minister of Technology at Main Street Baptist Church!”)
Another helpful idea was that technology buyers should sit down and work
out a plan encompassing their long-range needs before making purchases,
to reduce the need for expensive and troublesome upgrades later. One of
the most convincing speakers along this line was Carol Maero from Disney
World, who pointed out some of their most fascinating rides still run on
eight-track tapes and twenty-year-old mainframe systems because of such
planning.
Then there were discussions about the value of industry-educator
collaboration—an area homeschoolers ought to be thinking about far more
than we currently are.
Finally, several speakers warned—wisely—against a “Pollyanna” view of
technology. Christopher Dede, an educational futurist with George Mason
University, said users “could end up neglecting the real world while
erecting empty castles in hyper-space.” You thought television could be
dangerous—try virtual reality. This is good to think about when
considering how to use technology at home.
At least among the Global Village leadership, a more positive view of
homeschooling prevails than is common among educational elites. The
Global Village statement of purpose specifically lists homeschoolers
among those they wished to be involved. GVI Executive Director James
Mecklenburger said this about small, home-based academies—something very
close to full-blown home schools: “‘Cottage Schools’ is a pleasant name
for the phenomena of home-based schools; neighborhood learning centers.
These are approaches to education that become more feasible at high
levels of quality, as the information age reduces the need for school
campuses.” One conference attendee, a public school teacher, wrote about
such schools: “Would cottage schools be too isolated socially? I believe
our present system isolates our children far more than a home
environment would. . . . Flexibility and close supervision is the key to
positive social interaction; the cottage system has it, and the
institutional school system does not.”
Now we turn to the dark side of the Global Villages conference. From
time to time attendees were immersed in a strong under-tow of
hyper-humanistic and even deconstructionist (“we create our own
realities”) thinking that could be, well—flaky at times. In one plenary
session with several hundred in the audience, we were informed by Linda
Farley at ACT Academy that her students “can be trusted to construct
their own knowledge.” To be fair, Farley also talked of resolving
tension “between what the learner wants to know and what we want them to
know.” William Crocoll, a District Superintendent in Vermont, said that
in his schools there were no curriculums. Of six major presentations in
that session, all emphasized “self-direction” to the point where at
times it seemed there was little a student had to learn. Afterwards, a
black elementary school principal turned to me and said, “They don’t
seem to understand that a lot of kids—like many I deal with—need more
structure, not more freedom.”
|
|
Ted Turner preaching his sermon
|
At times, there were complete breaks from reality. Paul Messier of the
National Learning Foundation, a great fan of Labor Secretary Robert
Reich and Vice President Al Gore, talked in Gore-like terms about
“reinventing” things. Healthy students, he said, must learn to “rescript
themselves,” “add reality,” “create reality,” and “play with reality.”
Towards the end of his talk, he warned us all, “Create yourself by
design, or be created by default.” Walking out of that sessions, it was
easy to remember Dede’s warning from the previous session against
“erecting empty castles in hyper-space” with technology—something
Messier and not a few others there seemed prone to do.
In the area of morals, most of the presenters left no doubt of their
thoroughly humanistic and relativistic approach—one made more dangerous
by the kind of technology at their disposal to promote it in
impressionable students. Teachers and parents were not emphasized as
authority figures; no one dealt with their role in enforcing objective
morals. Up to half of the presenters gave lists of the character traits
they sought to instill in students. Compassion, love of learning,
self-directed, team-oriented and so on were mentioned by most. Except
for these values needed to be “global village learners,” absolutes were
avoided. Students were not to be corrected against sinful tendencies
such as sloth and stubbornness. John Newsom, media consultant with
Bellevue Public schools near Seattle, was plainer than most, but not
atypical, when he said, ”Everyone is on a non-judgmental learning curve
. . . don’t do anything directive.”
This weakness in the Global Villages world became most evident in the
main luncheon event of the conference, a lengthy speech by Ted Turner,
owner of Turner Broadcasting. He opened his monologue with an attack on
Christian beliefs, asserting, “This is my take on religion—God didn’t
create man in His own image, we created God in our own image.” Towards
the middle of his speech, following a humorous but incessant attack on
the Catholic Church, polluters, the military, large families, and other
scapegoats of the Hollywood Left (he is presently married to Jane
Fonda), he gave his ten “voluntary initiatives” to replace the Ten
Commandments which, he claimed, “needed updating.” These included none
of the “old” ten, but did include ones like, “I promise to have no more
than two children—or no more than my nation suggests,” “I support the
United Nations and its efforts to collectively improve conditions on
this planet.” His new “suggestions” were followed by laughter and
prolonged applause; the finish of his speech by a long, standing ovation
by a crowd of over 500 educators.
Obviously, not everyone in the room agreed with Turner wholeheartedly,
nor would it be fair to label his views the norm for Global Villagers
based only on their enthusiastic reception. Turner was funny, he is a
celebrity, and of course, as a group it is probable that Global
Villagers are anxious to win his favor. Still, it is not at all
comforting that our Protestant Practical Homeschooling writer was the
only one of over 500 in the audience to decide on principle not to stand
during the thunderous ovation at the end, after a direct assault on the
Catholic faith, Christianity, the God of the Bible, the Ten Commandments
and so forth. (There weren’t even any Catholics there? No Jews?)
Nor did it help much afterwards when we were told by Mark Sherry of the
Center for Educational Leadership and Technology, one of three
co-sponsors of the conference, that Ted Turner supported Global Villages
in a big way this year through free advertising and other public
support, and that they hoped by next year to claim him as a major
financial backer as well. This is hardly likely to discourage some of
the negative tendencies we described earlier!
In the main, Global Villagers are sympathetic to many technological and
educational innovations of real value, which homeschoolers ought to
applaud and take advantage of. And they are more congenial to
homeschooling than many educators. However, we also observed New Age
tendencies and more than a little bias against central Christian
beliefs. This cannot and should not be ignored.
Yet we homeschoolers can learn a lot here—far too much to ignore or
discard because of these concerns. In a short talk over a month after
the conference, James Mecklenburger, GVI Executive Director, told us
that he is very desirous of seeing more involvement by homeschoolers in
their conferences. Perhaps some savvy Christian homeschooling leaders
could make a presentation or two at the next Global Village conference.
Done cautiously, this need not be a bad thing at all.
For more information on the Global Villages movement, try the Global
Villagers open forum on America Online, launched in July of 1994.
