8/6/2019 Past or Present Paradigms of Thinking
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/past-or-present-paradigms-of-thinking 1/3
PAST OR PRESENT PARADIGMS OF THINKING
By
Mike King
Published: July 10, 2011
I n every story there is a story line and what keeps the story line interesting is the back stories.
Today we are going to tell the story of Adopting Technology into the Common Core. We are
also going to tell the back stories of how students will learn best in the Common Core. These
back stories will be about inflection points, and past or present paradigms of thinking. The new
back stories will be about thinking outside of the box for a new generation, a new generation of
learners who will be asked to perform authentically while thinking abstractly.
Let's take one example of an
inflection point as it might be
related to the future. This back
story concerns the launching of
Netscape as Thomas Friedman
points out the importance of
“inflection points” in his tory. You
know, inflection points, the point
in a curve at which it changes
direction from convex to concave,
or vice versa . Friedman states in
his book entitled the World is Flat that when Netscape was launched “We went from a world
where value was created in vertical silos of command and control to one in which value is
created horizontally on this platform by who you connect and collaborate with… I would argue
that shift from command-and-control to connect-and-collaborate is the mother of all inflection
points. … It is the biggest event, I would argue, to change human beings and how they interact,
since Guttenberg invented the printing press.” Now how does this back story on inflection
8/6/2019 Past or Present Paradigms of Thinking
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/past-or-present-paradigms-of-thinking 2/3
points relate to the plot of our story -- Education is at an inflection point – a strategic
opportunity to change course or direction.
We are now introduced to the next back
story of a paradigm, a paradigm of
dysfunctional proportions , the idea of
accountability as established through No
Child Left Behind. A paradigm is a set of rules
and regulations that does two things: (1) it
establishes boundaries; and (2) it tells you
how to behave inside the boundaries in order
to be successful. But what if the paradigm iswrong? What if the boundaries that are set
for you are out of proportion to how you
measure success? In this case the back story
of No Child Left Behind.
A little bit too late, or is it a little bit misunderstood? "Our education system was never
designed to deliver the kind of results now needed to equip students for today's world- andtomorrow's. The system was originally created for a very different world. To respond
appropriately, we need to rethink and redesign." The problem with this statement is that it was
published in 2006 which advocates the old paradigm of thought as the book entitled "Change
Leadership," is operating under the premises of No Child Left behind. What is prominent in this
back story is the failure to recognize a system that forces us to continue to improve the current
system, a system designed in reporting progress on two dichotomy lines, success or failure.
In April of 2011 the National Center for Fair & Open Testing concluded that practices
implemented through NCLB have been unsuccessful. NCLB has not succeeded, with rare
exception, in even maintaining the previous rates of improvement. In a recent June 13th, 2011
article of " eSchool News" the Secretary of Education, Arne Duncan, was reported as saying,
"that 82 percent of U.S. schools could be labeled failures in the year 2012 if No Child Left
8/6/2019 Past or Present Paradigms of Thinking
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/past-or-present-paradigms-of-thinking 3/3
Behind isn’t changed. " This statement only reinforces popular opinion that the majority predict
that no one state will meet the law’s goal of having 100 percent of students proficient in math
and reading by 2014.
These statements of predicted failure for public
education under the NCLB Act is articulated in
another way in terms of lack of authenticity in
an article November 2008 article “Why Rising
Test Scores May Not Equal Increased Student
Learning.” In the article the author David
Berliner states, "It is not uncommon for 20-60
school days per year to be spent in test-preparation activities. Children trained to answer questions are drilled on items that will appear
on their test. But that is not education. It is training. It is less clear that any authentic learning
has occurred.” Have we now after ten years of struggling with the reality of the first paradigm,
finally came to grips that the educational system is in fact, in need of reauthorization?
Now that leads us back to the plot of the story and its most essential question, "What is
reauthorization?" Reauthorization is simply moving away from the first paradigm as we arenow in a paradigm shift. A paradigm shift is discovering problems that we cannot solve which
triggers a catalyst in new ways of thinking. Thinking the Common Core way. A way to reach
success for all as it is defined in college and career readiness. Yet we know that in every
paradigm shift begins a new set of problems. It is the special set of problems that everyone in
the field wants to be able to solve. But in the shift it becomes very complex in that no one has a
clue as how to solve it.
This article is written for the purpose of providing the reader with information on how to adopt technology into the CommonCore by relooking at traditional classroom tools and transitioning into new ways of teaching and learning. The Digital Sandboxexplores the future of learning through the recreation of 21st Century learning environments. Visit the Digital Sandbox:http://digitalsandbox.weebly.com/