Slashdot Mirror


Personalized Learning: the Best Education Or the Worst?

theodp writes: In an exclusive interview with Education Week, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg talked about why he is shifting his K-12 giving priorities to personalized learning. While acknowledging that there's not yet any independent, large-scale research to show personalized learning's effectiveness, Zuck argues that "the model just intuitively makes sense." But just days later, Fordham University professor Mark Naison wrote in the Washington Post about why the personalized learning efforts of 'a growing number of those with investment capital seeking profitable outlets,' which presumably includes Zuck, make him 'incredibly pessimistic' about the future of public education. That Zuck — like fellow personalized learning cheerleaders/funders Bill Gates and former U.S. Education Chief Arne Duncan — seemed to be unaware of studies on personalized learning studies that date back to the '70s is troubling. But people don't "Like" 40+ year-old Ed.gov papers, so Zuck could be forgiven for not seeing them and, as a result, believing that the personalized learning plan dashboard his Facebook engineers knocked out truly is the ground-breaking solution to 'one of education's biggest problems' that Melinda Gates cracks it up to be.

9 of 143 comments (clear)

  1. You know... by rmdingler · · Score: 5, Insightful
    It is human nature to imagine fame and success make you ideally suited to solve all the world's problems.

    I don't know who said, "the more you know, the more you realize you don't know," but this is not the conclusion a great number of intelligent people automatically arrive at.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:You know... by Dunbal · · Score: 3

      Well Angelina Jolie said that we should listen to Zuckerberg on this...

      Seriously though, it's not just human but also animal nature to "worship" the successful. While that used to be the big alpha male who always won his fights, and through humanity turned into the chieftain or the king who also always won his fights (after all, God shall protect the right)... in today's world we no longer value fighting so much, so we worship the ones set on a pedestal before us ("famous" people) and the ones who make a lot of money. Is that right? No. But it's how human brains are wired.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:You know... by ceoyoyo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Last week I told a grad student "grad school is where you learn that you don't know nearly as much as you think you do. A postdoc is where you learn that nobody else does either."

  2. Please just be a bank account by sjbe · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While acknowledging that there's not yet any independent, large-scale research to show personalized learning's effectiveness, Zuck argues that "the model just intuitively makes sense."

    All sorts of things "just make sense" that are actually completely wrong when objectively examined. That's why we do experiments to see if they actually work before rolling them out in a big way. Basing policy on a hunch is REALLY stupid unless you have no other choice and this is not one of those times where we have no other choice. Maybe he's in the test phase but it sure doesn't sound like an experiment. It's annoying how Zuckerberg (and Gates) thinks that because he was successful in software that it somehow qualifies him to be something more than a bank account for areas of endeavor where he demonstrably has no special expertise or insight. At least Gates no longer has a day job so conceivably he has the time to actually devote to the details of these issues. There is no way Zuckerberg actually has enough time to really do much more than parrot what the people he hired are telling him.

  3. 40+ years old studies by AchilleTalon · · Score: 3, Informative

    The problem with 40+ years old studies on computer aided learning is the computing lanscape has changed so much since then they are mostly irrelevant. Even the University of Illinois at Urbana is making the shift offering on-line education.

    --
    Achille Talon
    Hop!
    1. Re:40+ years old studies by Sique · · Score: 5, Informative
      And if you read the WP article, you know why: To save on teaching staff. The head count of the teachers at universities and other educational institutions has stagnated since decades, but enrollment has exploded, and so has administrative staffing (and the wages for the administrational staff).

      It's not because online education is inherently better, it's because you can offer the same course material to more people without investing into more buildings, additional positions for teachers and mentors or any other infrastructure that actuallyhelps the students. No one cares if it profits the single student, as long as you can profit from more students.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
  4. Re:Personalised by ganv · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Yes, all the studies showing problems with personalized learning are simply showing that we had not yet figured out how to do it well. There is simply no way that a one-size-fits all bureaucracy can educate as well as a system with tools that allow teachers to tailor activities to individual children. The problem is that personalized education is a much harder problem than many believe. It is easy to make an app that adapts the math problems assigned to a student's performance. But it is much harder to produce group learning activities that match varied skills. And if you put kids each on a single computer which is 'personalized', you can be sure they will learn less than if they are working together learning the social skills and executive function needed to succeed in the world. Eventually we'll succeed in personalizing teaching of social skills, executive function, reading, and math. But it is a hard problem.

    In many ways the problem is like artificial intelligence. It is a much harder problem than people thought. But that doesn't mean that it is impossible and as parts of it are solved it slowly changes everything.

  5. Personalized meal service by Overzeetop · · Score: 3, Funny

    I find that personalized meal service - where you provide your specific preferences and dislikes, along with any allergy information and your personal weight and fitness goals, is by far the most effective way to enjoy your meal and maximize your health. In fact, as a billionaire, its the only way I can see to get and keep everyone healthy. It just takes some planning and seed funding to create a few proof-of-concept restaurants that can do just that. After that it should be simple to, for example, provide the exact same personalized service to the entire deployed military forces for their daily meals.

    --
    Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
  6. Re:Personalised by NotDrWho · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes, all the studies showing problems with personalized learning are simply showing that we had not yet figured out how to do it well.

    No, we know exactly how to do it *well*. Each student's parents just need to hire an individual full-time tutor for their kid, who can then teach them in whatever way best suits that individual kid.

    The problem is that we haven't found a way to to it *economically* or *practically* for all those students whose parents can't afford to hire an individual tutor.

    --
    SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.