Immagic.com



[pic]

Hacking Education

Union Square Ventures Sessions Event

6 March 2009

Agenda | Confirmed Attendees | Location | Topics of Discussion | Reading

Hacking Education Pictures [omitted]

Hacking Education Recordings and Transcript

Hacking Education Agenda

HACKING EDUCATION

A hack essay solves a problem in a way that it breaks some established and widely accepted rule or conventional wisdom. The web has enabled many transforming hacks. For instance, Kiva and DonorsChoose are web based hacks that reinvent philanthropy making it possible for donors to fund recipients directly and to follow up and monitor the impact of their contribution. Craigslist is a hack that disintermediated the multi-billion dollar classified advertising industry, largely replacing it with a fabulously efficient web based network.

The Hacking Education Sessions event will bring together around 30 entrepreneurs, researchers, and educators for a day-long conversation about the impact of the web on education. Our goal is to encourage innovation in education by exposing educators to entrepreneurs whose appreciation for the web's technical and social architecture has enabled them to build important online services, and by exposing entrepreneurs to the challenges and opportunities of reinventing education using the web. We are also inviting researchers who study education policy and changes in learning, such as the emergence of self-directed studies and peer accreditation in online tenant screening forums for everything from anime to open source to essay writing and custom essay. Essay writing is more and more important in students' life. However, it takes more and more time from their leisure activities. Therefore, essay services are very useful to make students' life easier.

ABOUT SESSIONS

Union Square Ventures occasionally brings together a small but diverse group of entrepreneurs, innovators, and thinkers, for a day-long conversation about ideas that could have far reaching implications. We call these conversations Sessions. Previous Sessions have covered peer production, public policy and philanthropy.  Sessions are invite only and we bear the cost. 

AGENDA

9:30 - 10:00 Arrival (Coffee & pastries)

10:00 - 10:15 Welcome

10:15 - 11:15 Session 1: Goals of Education, Measuring Success

11:20 - 12:20 Session 2: Technology and Social Leverage on the Web

12:30 - 1:30 Birds-of-a-Feather Lunch (sandwiches, not birds)

1:30 - 2:30 Session 3: New and Old

2:40 - 3:40 Session 4: Access, Funding, Scaling

3:50 - 4:00 Wrapup

4:00 - 5:00 Mingle (Snacks & drinks)

|Hacking Education Location |

|[pic] |

| |

The French Institute

Le Skyroom

22 E 60th St, New York, NY 10022

(Please note this event is by invitation only)

|Hacking Education Topics |

|[pic] |

| |

Topics of Discussion

Goals and role of education?

- Is there a difference between learning and education

- How is this changing as the economy is changing?

- What are we training people for?  How is it different than what we've done in the past.

- Daniel Pink's "A Whole New Mind"

Learning how to learn

- Has the web changed the way people learn, should we expect it to?

- Is web literacy a prerequisite to be a successful student (today? in five years?)

How do we measure success?

- Alternatives to standardized testing

- Who controls accreditation?

- Should content + interaction + assessment be disaggregated? 

Access

- Do we need OLPC for US?

- Should we subsidize connectivity?

Sources of Motivation

- Intrinsic

- Fun (learn through games)

- Explicit rewards (pay for grades)

Role of Schools and Teachers

- The challenge of a high rate of change for teachers

- Barriers to integrating technology in the classroom

- Students more "web literate" than many teachers?

- What about success of school-based models (e.g. KIPP)? And is a more costly approach scale-able? Is it for everyone?

Content generation

- Open sourcing

- Peer production

- Collaboration around content

- Should we subsidize content capture? (Content as Infrastructure)

Business models

- Free / not-for-profit

- Direct to student

- Via existing institutions

- New distribution channels / platforms? (eg. Valve for educational software)

Promising technologies and how to deploy them

- Adaptive learning

- Casual games

- Immersive games / virtual worlds

- Simulations

- Authoring environments (and new means of expression)

Is Facebook a credible platform for learning?

- Does it teach web literacy skills?

- Can it teach other skills and/or knowledge?

- Can it serve as a foundation for other learning experiences (virtual worlds, gaming)

- How do we tackle moderation and privacy in the education context

Models of learning

- Role of repetition

- Memorization versus lookup

- Construction/manipulation

- Critical reasoning

- Exploration and Experimentation

"Open Education" Movement

-  Cape Town Declaration ()

-  Successes and Failures of 'open source' curriculum in K-12 and Higher Ed

-  Social Networking Models for teachers, students, and parents

-  State of K-12 Knowledge Management Systems

-  OER as Reuse vs. OER as Transparency 

Innovative funding opportunities for edu ventures

- A YCombinator-esque fund for edu startups

- Using NCLB funding for innovation rather than to maintain status quo

- Opportunity for start-ups to leverage flexible education spending accounts for retraining ()

Scaling education initiatives into the developing world

- Microfinance for education

- Lessons learned from things like Sugata Mitra's "Hole in the Wall" experiments ()

Human Capital in U.S. Education

- How do we recruit and sustain talent

- How do we deal with the current realities

- Mike Petrilli's thesis: we need to create extraordinary schools with ordinary teachers

 

Democratizing Education

- How can affordable higher education function as a stimulus package for the global economy?

- How have eLearning and educational technology changed traditional concepts of education?  Where are the biggest opportunities?

- What are the advantages of peer-to-peer learning? How does this pedagogical model impact retention rates?

|Hacking Education Session Attendees |

| |

|Name |

|Bio |

| |

|[pic] |

|Danielle Allen |

|Widely known for her work on justice and citizenship in ancient Athens and its application to modern America, Danielle Allen is the author |

|of The World of Prometheus: The Politics of Punishing in Democratic Athens (2000) and Talking to Strangers: Anxieties of Citizenship Since |

|Brown vs. the Board of Education (2004).  In 2002 she was awarded a MacArthur Fellowship for her ability to combine "the classicist's |

|careful attention to texts and language with the political theorist's sophisticated and informed engagement." Allen's plans for future work|

|include a theoretical study of politics and change; an historical study of Platonic political thought; an examination of the concept of |

|equality; and a theoretical study of democracy, knowledge and higher education. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Charles Best |

|Charles Best founded at Wings Academy, a public high school in the Bronx where he was a social studies teacher for five |

|years. He thought up during a lunch conversation with colleagues, and his students volunteered to help start the |

|organization. To entice his fellow teachers to try out the new website, Charles offered them his mother's famous pear dessert. |

| has been growing since. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Jon Bischke |

|Jon is the business visionary behind eduFire and has over a decade of experience helping people to teach and learn online. He has been |

|involved in starting two companies that have been acquired by publicly-traded companies (The Network, acquired by Penton |

|Media in 2001 and Zaadz, acquired by Gaiam in 2007) and a third () which is currently operating profitably. |

| |

|[pic] |

|danah boyd |

|danah boyd a Researcher at Microsoft Research New England and a Fellow at Harvard Law School's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. I |

|recently completed my PhD at the School of Information (iSchool) at the University of California (Berkeley). My research examines social |

|media, youth practices, tensions between public and private, social network sites, and other intersections between technology and society. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Asi Burak |

|Asi Burak co-founded ImpactGames to influence society and promote change through interactive media. The company has developed the |

|internationally acclaimed PeaceMaker game. Their current project, PlaytheNews,  was publicly launched in Spring 2008 and has been |

|integrated with top-tier media partners.  Prior to that, Asi was VP of Marketing at Axis Mobile, Art Director at Saatchi & Saatchi and a |

|Captain in the Israeli Intelligence Corps. He holds a Masters of Entertainment Technology from Carnegie Mellon and a BA in Design from the |

|Bezalel Academy in Jerusalem. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Brad Burnham |

|Brad Burnham is both an experienced operator and venture capitalist. His first experience with venture capital was as a member of the |

|founding team of a mainframe software company in 1984. From 1985 until 1990, Brad was a marketing and business development executive for |

|AT&T Computer Systems. In 1990, Brad founded Echo Logic, a Bell Laboratories spin out. As the first AT&T "venture," Echo Logic was the |

|catalyst for the creation of AT&T Ventures, an independent venture capital partnership formed by AT&T in 1992. When Echo Logic was sold in |

|1993, Brad joined AT&T Ventures as an Executive In Residence. He became a Principal in 1994 and a General Partner in 1996. At AT&T |

|Ventures, Brad was responsible for 14 investments including, Argon Networks, Audible, Avesta Technologies, Classic Sports Network, Multex |

|Systems, Physicians Online, and Paytrust. Brad currently serves on the boards of Passlogix, Indeed and Tacoda Systems. Brad has a BA in |

|Political Science from Wesleyan University. Brad is married with two kids and lives in New York City. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Gaston Caperton |

|Gaston Caperton is the eighth president of the College Board, a non-profit membership association founded in 1900 that consists of 5,400 of|

|the nation’s leading schools, colleges and universities. A former two-term governor of West Virginia (1989-1997), Caperton was appointed to|

|his current position in 1999. |

| |

|Caperton believes that the high standards found within the College Board’s Advanced Placement Programs transform schools and change lives. |

|During the Caperton years, the number of low-income students taking AP courses has tripled. Though AP Exams have remained rigorous, student|

|performance has improved. Caperton has also worked to initiate a new series of AP world language and culture courses, including AP Chinese |

|and Japanese, World History, Human Geography and Comparative Government and Politics as a series of offerings to prepare students to |

|participate in a global community. |

| |

|Under Caperton’s leadership, two additional initiatives were created, focusing on college preparation for underserved students: College |

|Board Schools which designed for preparing underserved students for successful college matriculation (14 College Board Schools operate in |

|New York City, Rochester, and Buffalo); and the EXCELerator™ program, designed for existing high schools with commitment to reform |

|(currently, 27 EXCELerator Schools operate in Chicago, DC, 2 counties in Florida, and Denver). |

| |

|[pic] |

|Mike Caulfield |

|Mike Caulfield developed his first major online education project for Northern Illinois University in 1997. Since then he has designed and |

|developed some of the world’s first Flash-based early literacy software (Cognitive COncepts, GameGoo: 1999), produced online Ivy League |

|courses (Cognitive Arts, Columbia Online: 2000), built award-winning training software for Cable and Wireless (2002), designed the |

|interface and search mechanism for the largest archive of historical newspapers in the world (Newsbank, EAN: 2004), and created a |

|nationally recognized online political community (Blue Hampshire: 2006).  |

| |

|He is currently the Director of Community Outreach for the OpenCOurseWare Consortium. |

| |

|Nt Etuk |

|Ntiedo “NT” Etuk is the CEO and founder of Tabula Digita, the company that developed Dimenxian (a promising educational video game that |

|purports to improve mathematics skills). During his years in corporate America, Mr. Etuk was actively engaged in tutoring mathematics in |

|The Big Brothers Big Sisters programs. This raised his awareness of the challenges faced by students in today's under funded and |

|overburdened school systems. These experiences inspired Mr. Etuk to begin developing alternative teaching methodologies that enable |

|students to learn while they play. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Jose Ferreira |

|Knewton CEO Jose Ferreira was formerly an executive at Kaplan, Inc., where he designed their first learning systems that generated a unique|

|study plan for each student. He invented Kaplan’s Preview/Classroom/Review course architecture, and, in 1995, led a company-wide |

|re-engineering effort that designed the courses used today. He is the only person whose strategies the Educational Testing Service (ETS) |

|admitted “broke the code” on question types, forcing them to discard hundreds of thousands of test booklets. He also reverse-engineered the|

|security and scoring algorithms on computerized testing, compelling the test-makers to pull the test for months of massive revisions, and |

|earning the moniker “The Antichrist” inside ETS. |

|Jose spent 16 years thinking about and designing Knewton before he launched the company in 2008. Knewton hosts any 3rd-party education |

|content, using network effects to provide atomic-concept-level adaptive learning to students and reporting to teachers and parents.  |

| |

|[pic] |

|Teri Flemal |

|Teri (Cavallaro) Flemal has been an educator for 15 years, teaching in private and public schools in New Jersey as well as tutoring |

|privately in Manhattan. In 2001 she received the Governor's Teacher Recognition Award in Spring Lake, NJ for excellence in teaching, and in|

|2000 was awarded the Monmouth County, NJ Literacy Scholarship for developing a unique program to teach creative writing to students.  After|

|moving to Manhattan in 2004 Teri began teaching privately as a studio teacher, working with child actors ages 5-16 on television sets, |

|movies and Broadway shows. It was during this time that she met the Meyer Mensch family and became the primary teacher in their Manhattan |

|home school. Together with Melissa Meyer, the two created a comprehensive and exciting program for the children that integrated |

|honors-level academics with family travel, including studies in math, French, piano, science, English language arts, literature, art |

|history and more.  In 2008, inspired by the success of their own endeavor and recognizing the need for educational options in New York City|

|and environs, Ms. Flemal and Ms. Meyer created and launched a unique educational consulting company, Quality Education by Design (QED). |

|Reaching back to the classic tutor-pupil model, they work closely with their clients to establish goals, provide excellent teachers, create|

|individualized and challenging curriculum and oversee every aspect of an education-by-design. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Bing Gordon |

|Bing Gordon is currently a Partner at Kleiner Perkins. Bing was Chief Creative Officer of Electronic Arts from 1998 to 2008, after heading |

|EA marketing and product development off and on since EA's founding. He joined EA in 1982 and helped write the founding business plan that |

|attracted KPCB as an initial investor. Bing has driven EA's branding strategy with EA Sports, EA's pricing strategy for package goods and |

|online games, and has contributed design and marketing on many EA franchises including John Madden Football, The Sims, Sim City, Need for |

|Speed, Tiger Woods Golf, Club Pogo and Command and Conquer. Bing has been a director at Amazon since 2003, and was a founding director of |

|Audible, Inc. He is also a trustee of the Urban School of San Francisco, and serves on the Yale President's Advisory Council. Gordon earned|

|an M.B.A. degree from Stanford University, and a B.A. degree from Yale University. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Alex Grodd |

|Alex Grodd is the Founder and CEO of BetterLesson.  BetterLesson is a free organizational tool and curriculum development community that |

|helps educators connect and share high-quality resources, best practices, and ideas. |

| |

|After graduating from Harvard with a degree in political philosophy in 2004, Alex taught 6th Grade social studies in the Atlanta Public |

|School system as a Teach For America corps member, where he founded the Middle School Debate team and the Outward Bound Club.  He then |

|moved to Boston and taught 6th Grade English at Roxbury Preparatory Charter School, the 2006 – 2007 National Charter School of the Year.  |

|He created BetterLesson to address the instructional challenges that he faced during his time in the classroom. |

| |

|[pic] |

|[pic] |

|Idit Harel Caperton |

|My new grandson! Born |

|January 18, 2009 |

|Idit Harel Caperton, has been hacking education in the past 25 years [pic]... She is a social entrepreneur, educational technology |

|innovator, and epistemologist [pic]specializing in the study of the impact of social media technology and Web2.0 on the social and academic|

|development of children and youth, as well as educators and education systems worldwide. Her past research, along with that of Seymour |

|Papert and MIT colleagues, has contributed to the development of Constructionist learning theory (a hands-on approach to the use of |

|technology as a creative tool for learning through design and making digital stuff, within a culture that facilitates social construction |

|of knowledge, imagination and creative leadership). Idit earned degrees from Tel Aviv University (BA), Harvard (EdM and CAS), and MIT Media|

|Lab (PhD). |

|She is the Founder of the pioneering award-winning children's internet media company MaMaMedia Inc., the executive director of the |

|MaMaMedia Consulting Group (MCG), a builder of webgames, science Sims and websites, and, most recently, the Founder and President of the |

|World Wide Workshop Foundation -- known for their socially-responsible social networks for young game-makers . Globaloria |

|demonstrates how to transform public schools with social and programmable tech-tools that are relevant and engaging for participants. |

|Additionally, Idit has been a board member and adviser to several museums and universities (Harvard, MIT, CU, CUNY, ECNU in Shanghai and |

|BNU in Beijing), non-profits and educational media initiatives (PBS Kids, MEET, Saybot LLC), and is a regular featured speaker at |

|universities and educational technology conferences worldwide. |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

|Scott Heiferman |

|Scott Heiferman is Chief Organizer of Meetup, dedicated to 21st century local community organizing. Today, millions of people are part of |

|self-organized Meetup Groups around thousands of topics in over 100 countries -- with thousands of Meetups (real events) happening daily. |

|Meetup is now a self-sustaining operation, pursuing a long-range dream of a "Meetup Everywhere about Most Everything" -- giving everyone |

|access to a local community group when they need it. Heiferman received the Jane Addams Award from the National Conference on Citizenship |

|and the MIT Technology Review "Innovator of the Year". He graduated from The University of Iowa. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Michael Horn |

|Michael Horn is the Executive Director, Education and co-founder of Innosight Institute, a non-profit think tank devoted to applying the |

|theories of disruptive innovation to problems in the social sector. |

| |

|[pic]Chris Hughes |

|Chris co-founded and served as spokesperson for the online social directory, Facebook, with Harvard roommates Mark Zuckerberg and Dustin |

|Moskovitz. Hughes currently serves as a consultant for the popular site, but primarily acts as coordinator of online organizing within the |

|Barack Obama presidential campaign on My., the campaign's online social networking website. He also served on the National |

|Board of Directors of the Roosevelt Institution in 2005 and 2006. Chris Hughes is a graduate of Philips Academy Andover and Harvard |

|College. He graduated from Harvard in 2006. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Jeff Jarvis |

|Jeff Jarvis, author of What Would Google Do?, heads the interactive journalism program at the City University of New York Graduate School |

|of Journalism. He writes about media and technology at his blog, , and as a Guardian columnist. Jeff is a partner at |

|Daylife. He was creator and founding editor of Entertainment Weekly, TV critic of TV Guide and People, Sunday editor of the New York Daily |

|News, president and creative director of (the online arm of Advance Publications) and a columnist on the San Francisco |

|Examiner. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Lewis Johnson |

|Dr. W. Lewis Johnson is co-founder, president, and chief scientist of Alelo Inc. Prior to that he was Research Professor in computer |

|science at the University of Southern California / Information Sciences Institute. Alelo realizes his vision to promote the learning of |

|foreign languages and cultural competency worldwide. Alelo's game-based learning environments are in widespread use by military trainees in|

|the United States and other countries. Alelo is partnering with Yale University to develop integrated suites of learning materials for |

|Chinese and other languages. Lewis holds an A.B. in linguistics from Princeton University and a Ph.D. in computer science from Yale |

|University. At one time or another has had conversational proficiency in fifteen languages, although not all at the same time. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Steven Johnson |

|Steven Berlin Johnson is a popular science author and internet entrepreneur. He has written six books. He has worked as a columnist for |

|magazines such as Discover Magazine, Slate, and Wired, and co-founded the early webzine Feed Magazine in 1995. He is a Distinguished Writer|

|in Residence at New York University. |

|In 2006 Steven co-founded Outside.in, which is an attempt to collectively build the geographic Web, neighborhood by neighborhood". |

|Outside.in is a Union Square Ventures portfolio company. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Rob Kalin |

|Rob Kalin foundedl in 2005, a website for buying and selling hand-made goods. After three years as CEO of Etsy, Rob is now |

|focusing his energy on a company called Parachutes, whose mission is to build software that fully leverages the Web as a framework for |

|teaching and learning. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Bob Kerrey |

|Since 2001, Bob Kerrey has been president of The New School, a university founded on strong democratic ideals and daring educational |

|practices, and well-suited for his leadership. |

|Throughout his career in public service, while serving as a governor and U.S. senator from Nebraska during the 1980s and 1990s, Bob Kerrey |

|advocated for increased education spending. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Mark Loughridge |

|Mark Loughridge co-founded Foundation 9 Entertainment, the largest independent game developer in the world. Mark now works with Hawaii’s |

|largest private equity group, and also invests independently. He serves as co-chairman of Avatar Reality, a virtual world company with |

|intriguing potential for education (playful invention for end users, world-making, simulation).  Mark runs the Creative Academies, after |

|school programs that help 2nd-12th graders make their own games, animations, and small businesses. He is working on interactive television |

|with Time Warner Oceanic in which kids help make the educational content. His upcoming game “Start Up!” gives the casual player a taste of |

|mayhem and insight into entrepreneurship. He holds a Masters in Experimental Animation from CalArts and a BA in East Asian Studies from |

|Harvard. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Paul Miller |

|Paul is co-founder and CEO of School of Everything which aims to revolutionise the way education is organised by creating a simple way for |

|teachers and learners to find each other and meet up. He is also co-founder of Social Innovation Camp which brings together computer geeks |

|and people at the sharp end of social problems to create websites that solve social needs. Paul previously worked at the think tank Demos |

|where he wrote a number of agenda setting reports and essays about the future of technology, business and politics including the Pro-Am |

|Revolution and Disorganisation. He is also an associate of the sustainability charity Forum for the where he works with them on scenario |

|planning and innovation work. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Charlie O'Donnell |

|Charlie is the Co-Founder & CEO of Path 101, a NYC startup that is revolutionizing career guidance though the mining of data from millions |

|of public resumes. After funding VCs at the GM pension fund, and funding startups at Union Square Ventures, Charlie spent a year as |

|Director of Consumer Products at Oddcast before starting Path 101 with Alex Lines. The founder of nextNY, he also teaches entrepreneurship |

|at Fordham University and is the Entrepreneur-in-Residence and teacher of FastTrac at ITAC.  He has also started and run several student |

|internship and mentoring programs. |

| |

|[pic]Nancy Peretsman |

|Nancy B. Peretsman has served as a Director of since February 1999. Since June 1995, she has been a Managing Director of |

|Allen & Company LLC, an investment bank. Prior to joining Allen & Company, Ms. Peretsman had been an investment banker since 1983 at |

|Salomon Brothers Inc., where she was a Managing Director from 1990 to 1995. Ms. Peretsman serves on the Board of Directors for several |

|private companies. She is a member of the Board of Trustees of The New School. Ms. Peretsman is a Trustee of the Institute of Advanced |

|Study, and a member of the Board of Trustees of Princeton University. She is also a National Board Member of Teach for America. |

| |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|Shai Reshef |

|Shai Reshef is the Founder & President of the University of the People (UoP; ), the world’s first tuition-free, |

|online academic institution which will open its virtual doors in April 2009. Reshef has twenty years of experience in the international |

|education market and is currently the Chairman of (), an online global study community helping |

|hundreds of thousands of students with their homework. Formerly, Reshef served as Chairman of the Kidum Group, the largest for-profit |

|educational services company in Israel which he sold to Kaplan in 2005. Between 2001 and 2004, Reshef chaired KIT eLearning, a subsidiary |

|of Kidum, the eLearning partner of the University of Liverpool and the first online university outside of the U.S. Reshef holds a BA, magna|

|cum laude, from Tel Aviv University and an MA in Chinese Politics from the University of Michigan. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Mitchel Resnick |

|Mitchel Resnick explores how new technologies can help people (especially children) learn new things in new ways. His Lifelong Kindergarten|

|research group at the MIT Media Lab has developed a variety of educational tools, including the "programmable bricks" that were the basis |

|for the award-winning LEGO MindStorms robotics construction kit. Resnick co-founded the Computer Clubhouse project, an international |

|network of after-school centers where youth from low-income communities learn to express themselves creatively with new technologies. |

|Resnick's group recently developed a new programming language, "Scratch," which makes it easier for kids to create their own animated |

|stories, video games, and interactive art. Resnick earned a BS in physics from Princeton, and an MS and PhD in computer science from MIT. |

|Before pursuing his graduate degrees, he worked for five years as a science and technology journalist for Business Week magazine. He is the|

|author or co-author of several books, including Turtles, Termites, and Traffic Jams. |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

|Diana Rhoten |

|Diana Rhoten, PhD is director of the Knowledge Institutions program and the Digital Media and Learning project at the Social Science |

|Research Council. With funding from the MacArthur Foundation, she is leading the Learning Networks pilot project in New York City, which |

|uses a design-driven methodology to help non-formal learning institutions develop collaborative and interactive digital media and learning |

|strategies. Diana also spent the last two years as the founding program director of the Virtual Organizations & the CyberLearning programs |

|at the National Science Foundation. Her own research focuses on different approaches to knowledge production and dissemination, |

|particularly in light of the many emerging technologies. Recent publications can be found in Annual Review of Law and Social Science, |

|Thesis Eleven, Science, Nature, Research Policy, and Journal of Education Policy. She has also recently co-edited a volume entitled |

|Knowledge Matters: The Transformation of Public Research University. Diana is a Sigma Xi Distinguished Lecturer.  And, in a previous life, |

|Diana was co-founder of the Hybrid Vigor Institute, assistant professor at Stanford University School, and education policy advisor for the|

|Governor of Massachusetts. |

| |

|Sir Ken Robinson |

|Sir Ken Robinson is an internationally recognized leader in the development of creativity, innovation and human resources. He has worked |

|with governments in Europe, Asia and the USA, with international agencies, Fortune 500 companies, and some of the world’s leading cultural |

|organizations. In 1998, he led a national commission on creativity, education and the economy for the UK Government. All Our Futures: |

|Creativity, Culture and Education (The Robinson Report) was published to wide acclaim in 1999. He was the central figure in developing a |

|strategy for creative and economic development as part of the Peace Process in Northern Ireland, working with the ministers for training, |

|education enterprise and culture. The resulting blueprint for change, Unlocking Creativity, was adopted by politicians of all parties and |

|by business, education and cultural leaders across the Province. He was one of four international advisors to the Singapore Government for |

|its strategy to become the creative hub of South East Asia. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Jonathan Sackler |

|Jon Sackler co-founded and manages North Bay Associates, an investment company.  He serves on the board of a number of companies in the |

|pharmaceutical, energy and real estate industries, and on the board of Achievement First, a charter school management organization.  Jon |

|founded and chaired the board of ConnCAN (), a state-based education policy, advocacy, and community outreach organization |

|focused on improving public education and closing the achievement gap.  He co-founded Revolution Learning, a venture capital firm focused |

|on bringing to market innovative learning tools, platforms and formats. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Katie Salen |

|Katie Salen is Associate Professor in the Design and Technology, and Director of the Center for Transformative Media at Parsons the New |

|School for Design. She has worked as a game designer for over 10 years, is co-editor of The International Journal of Learning and Media, |

|and runs a non-profit called the Institute of Play, which is focused on research in games and learning. She is the lead designer on a new |

|public 6th-12th grade school called Quest to Learn (to open fall 2009), which uses the learning architecture of games as a pedagogical |

|model. Katie is the co-author of Rules of Play, a textbook on game design, The Game Design Reader, and served as editor of The Ecology of |

|Games: Connecting Youth, Games, and Learning, all from MIT Press. |

| |

|[pic]Dave Schappell |

|Dave's the founder & CEO of TeachStreet (now in Seattle, Portland, the Bay Area and Denver; expanding to NYC in early April). TeachStreet's|

|goal is to provide a place for people to Teach or Learn Anything. |

|Prior to TeachStreet, Dave worked at online pioneers and JibJab, and microfinance innovator, Unitus.  He has a B.S. in |

|Accounting from the Pennsylvania State University and attended the MBA program at The Wharton School of Business at the University of |

|Pennsylvania. |

| |

| |

|Suzanne Seggerman |

|(Free Soul photo by Joi Ito) |

|Suzanne Seggerman is President and Co-Founder of Games for Change (G4C) the primary non-profit and international nexus for those interested|

|in using digital games to address pressing contemporary issues - from global conflict to poverty, human rights to climate change. Called |

|"the Sundance of video games" for "socially-responsible game makers", G4C is working with a variety of high impact partners to foster and |

|shape this new genre, including Microsoft, mTV, the United Nations and and a variety of NGOs and universities. Suzanne recently won a |

|MacArthur Foundation Digital Media and Learning Competition award. Before co-founding G4C, Suzanne was a Director at NYC-based new media |

|think tank Web Lab, and a documentary film producer for PBS, including on Ken Burns/Stephen Ives PBS series "The West" and a Co-producer of|

|"Race For Life," a humanitarian aid and documentary film about Eastern Europe's environmental issues. Suzanne is a nationally-ranked |

|Scrabble player. |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

|Jessie Shefrin |

|Predicated on the movement between situations, events and circumstances, Shefrin’s work explores a sense of “expectancy” — the terrain of |

|the traveler — and looks at how narrative structures are reflected in moving and still images. It incorporates various media and processes,|

|including drawing, large-scale video/sonic installations and wide-format digital prints, and has been widely exhibited throughout the US |

|and abroad. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Jeff Shelstad |

|Jeff brings a 20 year successful record in higher education business publishing to the venture. He’s held positions of increasing |

|responsibility in sales, marketing, editorial, and senior management. Jeff has personally acquired some of the most successful business |

|textbook authors in print today. Most recently, Jeff served as Editorial Director at Prentice Hall Business Publishing, a division with |

|annual sales in the hundreds of millions. He had full P&L responsibility for the division, and managed a team of over sixty Acquisitions |

|Editors, Development Editors, Media Editors, and Project Managers. Jeff received his Executive MBA from Duke University in 2004. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Brian K Smith |

|Brian K Smith is an associate professor in the College of Information Sciences & Technology (IST) and affiliate professor of Education and |

|Computer Science Engineering at the Pennsylvania State University.  He studies the use of computation to support and enhance informal |

|learning and decision-making.  |

| |

|Smith received a Faculty Career Development Award from the National Science Foundation in 2000 to fund a research agenda around learning |

|with digital imaging technologies. He is an Apple Distinguished Educator and a recipient of the American Education Research Association's |

|Jan Hawkins Award for Early Career Contributions to Humanistic Research and Scholarship in Learning Technologies. He is a contributor to |

|the National Research Council's recent text on science learning in informal settings.  |

| |

| |

|[pic] |

|Tom Vander Ark |

|Tom Vander Ark is Managing Partner of Revolution Learning. Previously he served as President of the X PRIZE Foundation and Executive |

|Director of Education for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation where he developed and implemented more than $3.5 billion in scholarship and |

|grant programs to improve education throughout the United States. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Albert Wenger |

|Albert combines over 10 years of entrepreneurial experience with an in-depth technology background. As an entrepreneur, he has founded or |

|co-founded five companies, including a management consulting firm (in Germany), a hosted data analytics company, a technology subsidiary |

|for Telebanc (now E*Tradebank), an early stage investment firm, and most recently (with his wife), DailyLit, a service for reading books by|

|email or RSS. Albert also served as the president of del.icio.us through the company’s sale to Yahoo. His technology background goes back |

|to winning the German national computer science competition at age 18. Albert graduated summa cum laude from Harvard College in economics |

|and computer science and holds a Ph.D. in Information Technology from MIT. He has managed technology projects for organizations as diverse |

|as Tacoda (startup) and Telebanc (leading Internet bank). |

| |

|[pic] |

|Brian Willison |

|Brian Willison is the Director of the Parsons Institute for Information Mapping (PIIM) - a Research, Development, and Professional Services|

|organization located in New York City. |

|  |

|Mr. Willison has overseen technology, software development, usability, and data visualization programs and collaborations with the |

|Department of Defense, U.S. Congress, Dow Jones/News Corporation, Siemens, Raytheon, Oracle, Dun & Bradstreet, and numerous other public |

|and private organizations. Prior to his work with PIIM, Mr. Willison ran a successful technology consultancy with offices in New York City |

|and San Francisco. Mr. Willison contributed to software development and technology-based projects for AT&T, Microsoft, Charles Schwab, |

|Blockbuster, and eBay. |

|  |

|Mr. Willison is a graduate of the Lawrenceville School (Lawrenceville, NJ), holds a Bachelor’s degree from Washington University (St. |

|Louis, Mo.) and a Master’s degree from the Parsons The New School for Design (New York, NY). |

| |

|[pic] |

|David Wiley |

|Dr. David Wiley is Associate Professor of Instructional Psychology and Technology at Brigham Young University, Chief Openness Officer of |

|Flat World Knowledge, and Founder of the Open High School of Utah. He was formerly Associate Professor of Instructional Technology and |

|Director of the Center for Open and Sustainable Learning at Utah State University. David has also been a Nonresident Fellow at the Center |

|for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School, a Visiting Scholar at the Open University of the Netherlands, and a recipient of the US |

|National Science Foundation's CAREER grant. David is also the Founder of . His career is dedicated to increasing access to |

|educational opportunity for everyone around the world. David lives in Utah with his wife and five children. |

| |

|[pic] |

|Fred Wilson |

|Fred Wilson began his career in venture capital in 1987. He has focused exclusively on information technology investments for the past 17 |

|years. From 1987 to 1996, Fred was first an Associate and then a General Partner at Euclid Partners, a New York based, early stage, venture|

|capital firm founded in 1970. At Euclid Partners, Fred was responsible for a number of investments, including Freeloader, Multex, |

|PowerCenter Systems and UCA&L. In 1996, Fred co-founded Flatiron Partners. While at Flatiron, Fred was responsible for 14 investments |

|including, ITXC, Patagon, Starmedia, and Yoyodyne. Fred currently serves on the boards of Alacra, Comscore, iBiquity, Return |

|Path, Instant Information and Tacoda Systems. Fred has a Bachelors degree in Mechanical Engineering from MIT and an MBA from The Wharton |

|School of Business at the University of Pennsylvania. Fred is married with three kids and lives in New York City. |

| |

| |

| |

| |

|HackingEducationReading |

|[pic] |

| |

"Pay Attention" - video description " Since most of today's students can appropriately be labeled as "Digital Learners", why do so many teachers refuse to enter the digital age with their teaching practices?"



Daniel Pink, A Whole New Mind []

Mimi Ito, et al. Digital Youth Report:

Enhancing Child Safety and Online Technologies. Final Report of the Internet Safety Technical Task Force to the Multi-State Working Group on Social Networking of State Attorneys General of the United States.

Donald A. Schon, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think In Action []

James Paul Gee, What Video Games Have to Teach Us About Learning and Literacy []

David Williamson Shaffer, Foreword by James Gee, How Computer Games Help Children Learn []

Mitchel Resnick, Sowing the Seeds for a More Creative Society []

Mitchel Resnick, Rethinking Learning in the Digital Age []

Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organizations []

Russell Ackoff, Turning Learning Right Side Up []

Clayton Christensen, Disrupting Class []

Jeff Jarvis, What Would Google Do? []

Tony Wagner, The Global Achievement Gap []

The Cape Town Declaration []

Idit Harel Caperton, Amber Oliver, and Shannon Sullivan (December, 2008). The Case for Globaloria and its Learning Formula The World Wide Workshop Foundation, New York, NY []

The Education Arcade, MIT, Two white papers:

Moving Learning Games Forward []

Using the Technology of Today in the Classroom Today []

Testimony of Laurence F. Johnson, Ph.D. to the House of Representatives - Online Virtual Worlds: Applications and Avatars in a User-Generated Medium []

 New York Times Internet Lesson and Article   

Reinvigorating the Humanities

|Hacking Education Discussion |

|[pic] |

| |

Below are the transcripts from the Hacking Education Event

Session 1: Goals of Education, Measuring Success

************************************

*** Hacking Education Transcript ***

*** Part: 1 of 4 ***

************************************

UNION SQUARE VENTURES

HACKING EDUCATION

FRENCH INSTITUTE

22 EAST 60TH STREET, 8TH FLOOR

NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10022

FRIDAY, MARCH 6, 2009

10:00 A.M.

P R E S E N T:

Danielle Allen

Charles Best

Jon Bischke

Danah Boyd

Asi Burak

Brad Burnham

Gaston Caperton

Mike Caulfield

Nt Etuk

Jose Ferreira

Teri Flemal

Bing Gordon

Alex Grodd

Idit Harel Caperton

Scott Heiferman

Michael Horn

Chris Hughes

Jeff Jarvis

Lewis Johnson

Steven Johnson

Rob Kalin

Bob Kerrey

Mark Loughridge

Paul Miller

Charlie O'Donnell

Nancy Peretsman

Shai Reshef

Mitchel Resnick

Diana Rhoten

Sir Ken Robinson

Jim Rosenthal

Jonathan Sackler

Katie Salen

Dave Schappell

Suzanne Seggerman

Jessie Shefrin

Jeff Shelstad

Brian K. Smith

Tom Vander Ark

Albert Wenger

Brian Willison

David Wiley

Fred Wilson

P R O C E E D I N G S

(Time noted: 10:00 a.m.)

MR. WENGER: I feel a lot like a kid in

a candy store, because this topic is so important

and so interesting and there's so many great people

here. And I felt a little sorry to break up all

the conversations that were taking place just to

get people to sit down. But we want to get a start

and then we'll have plenty of opportunities for

further conversations, including lunch.

So, I want to just jump right in. I

wanted to say a few words, first of all, welcoming

everybody. Thank you all. Some people travelled

from far, including Europe, to be here. That's

great. The amazing thing is that everybody showed

up, which is wonderful.

So, a little bit before I get to the

format. I want to say thank you to Andrew, Eric

and... I can't see her right now, who handled all

the logistics, and did a fantastic job.

And the format itself is very simple.

We are to sit around this table and, hopefully,

have a conversation on this topic. And it'll be

somewhat loosely structured based on those ideas

that were contributed ahead of the event.

We are not doing intros. Everybody's

bio is up on the Wiki. And if you missed it, we

made a printout here. It could take an hour or so

of conversation. We're also not going to do a

wrap-up at the end. Last time we had gone around

and let everybody do a wrap-up, and that took an

hour and a half.

So, if you have plans to stay, stay.

And if it doesn't fit in the conversation at the

moment, you can say it at first. All you have to

do is tweet it and include, column, text edu...

make sure it's 50 characters, and it will show up

here. And we will hopefully get to it later.

MR. WILEY: Is there a password for the

wireless?

MR. WENGER: Yes, there is.

ERIC: I'll broadcast it on the screen.

(Indicating.)

MR. WENGER: I was supposed to e-mail

that around and -- other than that, I think

that's everything that is to be said about the

form. Thank you.

We're recording this and we're going to

be transcribing it, and we will have it up on the

web afterwards. And hopefully that will provide a

basis for a continued and ongoing discussion.

THE SPEAKER: It also means don't say

anything either that you don't want millions of

people to be able to read.

MR. WENGER: It's all going to go on

Twitter. It was invitee-only, but we're not trying

to close the results out from the world.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: Or be brave. Or be

brave.

MR. WENGER: So, we've broken the day,

loosely, into four sections. And the first

section, really, is to talk about the goals. What

should be the goals of education? What are the

things we're trying to accomplish? What are the

things, maybe more importantly, that we're trying

to avoid? And we are going to introduce each of

those four sections with a little video.

And so, we have this wonderful

inspirational video with a lot of love outside.

Actually, I think we have Sir Ken. I set up a

video for the first section. We're going to have

Sir Ken speak directly.

SIR ROBINSON: Have you seen this set

here? Do you know what we are talking about?

(Indicating.)

I spoke with Pat around two years ago

about creativity and about how education, on the

whole, is a precedent. And this video has been

downloaded now 4 million times, which is great,

from some points of view. But my son recently

showed me a video, that's also on YouTube, of two

kittens that seem to be having a conversation. It

takes 90 seconds, and that's been downloaded

18 million times.

(Laughter.)

So I'm not getting carried away,

but the reason I mentioned it is this talk is

about -- or that particular thing is about how

education, I believe, systematically -- not

deliberately, I think this is important -- but

systematically, tends to divert people from their

natural talent.

And in my experience, most adults as a

consequence have no idea what they are really

capable of achieving. Most parents, in my

experience, kind of bounce along, doing things that

they wandered into, with no great sense of passion

or commitment to it. I don't say that's true here;

you look passionate to me. But for the most part,

that's true.

And yet, all children are born with

immense natural talents. And education, you might

suppose, is for that child to evolve and develop.

And I believe it doesn't do it. I don't believe

it's deliberate, but I believe it's in the DNA of

the current system, and it is getting worse. As

you know, for those of you who live in America,

partly through the impact of legislation like No

Child Left Behind.

And the reason -- how many here are not

from America?

(A show of hands.)

Well, it applies -- you see the system

is doing the same thing. And the reason I think is

this: That education systems around the world were

originally evolved almost specifically to meet the

needs of industrialism.

So, there are already two parents for

education: One is industrialism, which is what

gives the organizational character of education,

it's linear character, in the sense of it being

organized around age groups.

You know, if you think of it, there are

some things that you simply take for granted in

education. One of them is that happens to young

people, and then it stops, pretty much. So, this

is front-loading the system. We're educated by an

age group. Why?

You know, it's like the most important

things they have in common is that they can

manufacture with the -- they are all four-year olds

and five-year olds. Education is obsessed with

getting people to college. Why?

I think you should go to college. I

don't know of a kid who never wanted to go to

college. Very few people who've gone to college

understand why, and there are now legions of people

leaving college with no idea what the whole thing

is for, going home and demanding an explanation.

I saw, probably when I first came to

America, it was a policy paper -- I think this was

in LA -- and it was called, College Begins in

Kindergarten. Well, it doesn't.

If we had more time, I can go into

this, but I don't. Kindergarten begins in

kindergarten. Somebody runs a great place, it's

called the Arc Children's Place in Dublin, and he

made a great comment. He said that a 3-year-old is

not half a 6-year-old; a 6-year-old is not half a

12-year-old. And so, they're 3, they are 6.

But in New York, in London, in Chicago,

all the great metropolitan cities, people are

competing to get their children into kindergarten,

to get into the right kindergarten. Kids are being

interviewed for kindergarten by the age of 3,

presumably producing presidents, sitting in front

of unimpressed selection probers, thumbing through

this stuff, you know, like "This is it; Been around

36 months."

(Laughter.)

"This is it? You've achieved nothing."

(Laughter.)

"First six months, breastfeeding --"

certainly that's obsession, and yet we don't know

anything about that. It is not linear. What

people go on to do isn't a function of what they

are becoming. Most people I know, and I guess it's

true of you, did not intend to do what they are

doing now when they were 5 or 10.

You know, they've evolved into this

through this, sort of, process of opportunity and

disposition and so on.

So, the program is very linear. And

that is embedded into the current system of

education, a hierarchy of subjects which is based

on an old idea of science and math and language and

arts and physics at the bottom.

I'm telling you this because one parent

of the current system of education is

industrialism. But there is a second parent of

education, which is the intellectual culture of

enlightenment, which is a view of intelligence that

reduces intelligence and affects a certain type of

deductive reasoning.

It's obsessed with academic ability, so

called. And while going to a university is not

higher than going to an art college or to a music

college or to a fashion college -- and there is, I

think, extraordinary and damaging division in

academic implications.

I was sitting down -- this book, by the

way (indicating) -- and not to promote this book --

well, I'll tell you about this because I was in

Northern California recently to sign a copy of the

book.

I did not, by the way, go all the way

to Northern California just to sign this one copy

of a book. There were many copies. But there was

this particular guy I was signing it for, and I

said to him, "What do you do?"

I've been having a lot of academic

invitations. And I said, "What do you do?"

He said, "I'm a fireman."

I said, "Fantastic. How long have you

been a fireman?"

He said, "All my life. All my adult

life. I've always wanted to be a fireman." He

said, "I got really mad at times in school about

this, because not every kid wants to be a fireman.

I actually wanted to be a fireman. And so, they

said that I was stupid, that if I didn't want to go

to college, I would never amount to anything."

And he said, "I always felt demeaned by

the job because of school. A man, six months ago,

I saved his life. He was in the car accident and I

pulled him out. I gave him CPR, and his wife too."

He said, "I think you think special of me."

(Laughter.)

What I'm saying is, our educational

system tumbles people, sort of a system, in the

interest of industrialism and through a particular

view of intelligence.

Now, the reason I'm telling you this

is -- not that you don't know it, it's because the

current system, in my view, is broken beyond

repair. Most school systems in the world are being

reformed, but reform isn't the issue anymore, I

think; it's transformation.

We need to reinvent education,

properly, for the 21st century. But we have to do

it, then, based on a different sense of economic

purpose or economic circumstances. But critically,

we have to build into it a different sense of

intelligence and creativity.

And I think the technologies that

you're talking about today, that you're going to be

involved in, are both -- one of the primary reasons

why the current system is broken, the revolution is

being triggered in part by the impact of these new

technologies around the world. It changed the

whole equation.

And they could also be part of the new

settlement. The problem was that you can't fix it

to evolve. But our kids are telling us something

important, that they have drawn constantly through

these technologies. They think about it

differently. They engage in the process and most

of the people in the educational system are beyond

the point in their lives where they're really fully

aware of the impact in technology.

You know, Mark... makes this

interesting distinction between digital matrix and

digital... I know it's the best distinction. But

the essential idea is if you are 25, you were born

before the digital revolution began. And some of

those people -- not all, but most adults have a

kind of passing relationship with digital culture.

I do myself, and I have started tweeting at the

urging of my kids.

I'm on Twitter and I have a thousand

followers. I can't tell you how great this makes

me feel. These people are interested in what I had

for breakfast.

(Laughter.)

I think that it's a great system

because my kids understand this far better than I

do. But the thing is, these technologies are

transformative, not just economically but

culturally.

So my take on this is that education

has three main purposes. One of them is

economical. There is no doubt in my mind that

education of all sorts has clear and powerful and

essential economic purposes, and any attempt to

transform education has to take account of it.

The problem is that the old economic

model doesn't work and none of us can figure out

how new economic models would fall out. So, that,

to me, puts a premium on innovation and creativity.

We have to think hard about that.

The second big purpose of education is

cultural. Everybody expects education will enable

kids to engage with the culture out of their own

sense of identity, and be part of the culture in

the global sense.

But how do you do that?

The third big part of education is

personal. Education has to focus also on personal

capability and what makes us distinct, as well as

what we have in common. And that, for the moment,

flattens out in the current systems of education.

Because the way in which we're promoting schools is

through standardizing rather than through

personalizing, customizing.

So, I see a vast potential in these new

technologies, not only within the system, but as a

way of creating breakouts in the system, new forms

in formal education.

This book, just very briefly, is based

on the premise that most people haven't discovered

their talents, but many people do. And a part of

education is a different sense of personal growth

and development.

The figures in America are, I think,

15,000 school districts in America. There are

90,000 schools. The dropout rate in public

education is 30 percent. There are growing numbers

of graduates who are unemployed.

And also, among the people who are at

school, there's growing levels of disaffection, not

only among students but among their teachers,

because they find that whole creative process, as

teachers, is being flattened out. And the normal

response in political circles is to demand control

methods.

And the whole point about these

technologies is they are not... control. They are

vernacular, they are grassroots and they are

cross-fertilizing technologies. How you stimulate

those, how you make them grow, is, of course, a big

challenge to the conversation.

But I just wanted to say that I think

that this conversation is not a fringe

conversation, although it's happening on the

fringes of education. I think what we're all here

to talk about today is a process of educational

development which could, I think, create a new

sentiment across the whole system.

But it would take, I think, not only

your knowledge of the technologies, but your being

willing to challenge who you're addressing. Is it

just the kids? Is it the students? Is it the

teachers? Is it the parents?

So, what are the things that you

reflect on your own education, that you have made,

that have held you back? I think it's worth

reflecting on those, in particular the sense of

intelligence.

My point about giving these numbers

about the schools is that when these numbers are

trotted out, it all gives the impression that this

is still a bit like...

My point is, you can't understand

education if you only think statistically. For

every child who drops out of school, for every kid

who doesn't succeed, even though he eventually

does, there is a personal story. Education is

always and inevitably personal. And the great

thing about these technologies is a way of

calibrating the personal involvement in the way

that they never did before.

So, I just wanted to mention the

conversation that we're about to have. I think

it's important, not just for you but the students

that we'll serve. And it could, I think, be a

historic moment in terms of the collaborations

being at least cultivated around the table.

So, I want to -- if I could stay for

this bit, really, is to hang on to the bit in the

middle.

And I just want to end with this.

There was a fantastic booklet a few years ago by a

guy called Peter Brooke. He's a theater director,

if you ever come across it. He wrote a book called

"The Empty Space." And he asked himself this

question. He was concerned most theater and is --

loose entertainment -- it's not invigorating. It's

like a passing time.

His thing is theater as a vibrant,

social and cultural force. So, he also analyzed

what goes wrong with the theater. So, he asked

himself this question. He said, What is the heart

of the theater? What is it? What is this thing we

are talking about? And to get to it, he started

the process of subtraction. He said, "What can you

take away from it and still have it?"

And he said, well, you can take away

the stage. Take away the script. You can take

away the lighting. See what's going on, you take

away the curtains, and you can take away the

building. You can take away all the crew, and you

can certainly take away the director. All of that

is very easy. Take it all out.

The only thing you cannot remove from

theater is an actor in a space and somebody

watching. That's the heart of it. And if either

of those parts is missing, there is no theater.

You need a performer and an audience. Theater is

that relationship.

And he said you should never add

anything to that relationship unless it improves

it. If it gets in the way, if it encumbers it, if

it makes it more difficult, you shouldn't have it.

And that's his problem with theater. Everything is

a distraction from the main business.

And that's, I suppose, what I want to

suggest here, that part of the conversation should

be about what's the heart of education? What is

the irreducible minimum? In public education, I

think we've lost sight of it. The heart of

education is what happens in the hearts and minds

of individual learners. You cannot make anybody

learn anything that they're not interested in

learning, if they don't see and feel the relevance

of it.

And what we've got now in this

industrialized system is a multitude of

distractions from this central purpose. The heart

of it is falling out of it because kids aren't

interested. What we have here is, an opportunity

to really engage kids' imaginations by giving them

education, using these technologies not to get in

the way but to enhance and properly develop --

collaboratively and creatively.

So, I want to thank Albert for the

tremendous conversation. I think it's a really

important one. I want to wish you well. I wish I

could be here longer, but I have another conference

to attend.

Thank you.

(Applause.)

MR. WENGER: So we're going to go home

and work hard on all of those things.

Thank you, Sir Ken.

I raised my hand when Ken asked who is

here who's not from the United States. I'm a U.S.

citizen, but I grew up in Germany. So, I want to

open this up for everybody. What are the goals

worth pursuing? Everybody should jump right in on

that.

MR. KALIN: I was at the economic forum

in Davos. The world is changing. I think it's

created a massive amount of opportunity. And I

started a company four years ago called ...

people who make a living making things.

And it's four years now, there are

about 350,000 sellers, 97 percent women. And these

are one to three person businesses for the most

part. And one of the talks in Davos is about how

you would get engaged... Sir Ken said something

and I think this really illuminated how education

is going to change.

He said, people graduating from school

now, their goal should not be to get a job; their

goal should be to create jobs for other people.

And when you look at that type of

entrepreneurialism, now, you can't teach that as a

disciplin because it's inherently

interdisciplinary.

The word "interdisciplinary" is

actually slapstick humorous to me. This is life,

the fact that you could think otherwise is humorous

to me.

And there is this other irony that all

these younger kids who spend so much of their time

online and then have to spend time online for

school using blackboard, software or anything, the

have to be forced to do it, and they don't enjoy

it.

They just do it by spending all that

time outside of school on the web. So, I think

that there's some connection there in terms of how

you empower students. You're not going to teach it

like that, and how the school curriculum could

change that or if that could be even part of the

curriculum.

MR. WENGER: Rob, how well did you do in

high school?

MR. KALIN: I graduated high school with

a D minus. I had an interesting argument with my

guidance counselor. My guidance counselor said,

"Drop out of high school, you'll have an easier

time getting into college if you just get a GED."

Then he said, "Not only am I not getting a GED --

(Laughter.)

-- but I'm going to graduate with this

D minus, and see how it does for me.

And it didn't get me into any

accredited school. I got a diploma program in an

art school in Boston, and it was near MIT. And

actually I used the art school to make a fake ID to

go to MIT.

(Laughter.)

Somebody said it was expensive, but I

said No, it is free, you just won't get credit for

it.

But the other part is, to do a college

degree. And if you're in college for four years --

in my experience, college degrees, their value in

the job market is getting less and less, but their

cost is increasing.

So, you have these two things are quite

at odds with each other. And that's going to

balance itself out. People are going to find

another way. I think that's the beauty of

humanity, you can't have systems that are so

monolithic now that you can say this completely

stifles creativity.

You know, there's people who just get

rejected in the system. You can't go through it

and they find other paths. And with the Web

nowadays, I think there's never been more

opportunity to find these other paths and connect

with other people.

MR. WENGER: Mr. Jarvis, you have

something to say?

MR. JARVIS: Just to play off what Rob

said -- and I didn't mean to plug my book, but as

Sir Ken did, I'll follow up. I wrote a book called

"What Would Google Do?" And in looking at that, I

came to two great conclusions myself.

One is that -- and I called this

"creation generation," but I realized that we

always want to create. And everyone wants to

create. We want to leave our hands on things. And

we have a system that doesn't enable this.

One survey, for the 81 percent of

Americans, I think, they have a book in them. We

can probably be grateful most don't come out, but

we should be sad that people don't have the chance

to try. And so, all I want to say is that the one

bing moment from me was wondering why education

does not have -- like, Google or 20 percent rule,

that people use 20 percent of their time to create

something and that education becomes an incubator

for that creation, because like what Rob said, it's

not a class I teach.

I teach entrepreneurial journalism,

which is not an oxymoron, at the City University of

New York. And it's all about them creating

whatever they can create and helping them do that.

And so, how can we help students create and, in

that process, learn? And we are not built to do

that at all. We are built to put out cookie

cutters and make them pass tests.

MR. WENGER: But don't you need skills?

Is teaching skills an important goal of school?

MS. BOYD: I think a lot of us in the

room are really interesting success cases, a lot of

people who also didn't play by the rules, any sort

of changes to the rules or -- may end up why we're

in this room to begin with.

I spent most of my time running around

the United States, interacting with teens who don't

necessarily have that mind set, don't necessarily

have those opportunities, and their priorities are

fundamentally different.

And one of the biggest priorities that

I hear, that strikes me as so different from my

own, was what it meant to make certain that you

stay with your family, you stay in your community

and that you're a part of a local social system and

they're watching as the jobs fall out of the local

economy.

Sir Ken, as a point of going back to

thinking, he -- about the industrial era and how

education perished. The industrialist is really

interesting. And we're still stuck in that. We're

watching as the industrial structures have fallen

out and, of course, it's devastating.

And we have these great opportunities.

And sitting in Manhattan, having those great

conversations about the creative cultures and what

all the awesome possibilities are for people who

are super motivated.

But at the end of the day I keep

wondering, what do we think about the vast majority

of people who are frankly being trained in the

service class labor?

And what is that training look like?

Do we prepare them for service class labor or

should we be thinking about how we prepare people

to find stuff that's not just about labor per se,

but about enjoying their life more broadly? And

this is where the creativity comes in.

My feeling in a lot of education is

that you may not be preparing people for the skills

of service class labor -- although there's certain

things that are done there -- but giving them the

tools to be creative when they want to be creative

in their personal lives; to create as a form of art

or a form of fun, the things that they can do when

they're not working 9:00 to 5:00.

Many of us in the room get to live --

you know, our work and leisure are sort of blended

into one. We love what we are doing. But can we

really truly expect everybody to be in that kind of

job mind set? And when do we have to actually

think about the balancing of the work and pleasure

and how we actually educate people to be happy?

MR. O'DONNELL: One thing that really

strikes me, anytime -- I teach an entrepreneurship

class at Fordham. And when I encourage students to

find something they really like doing -- and I tell

them, Look, as a finance major, I can tell you from

all my investment banker friends that the money is

not worth it if you don't like what you do.

And the assumption -- on behalf of the

students, and I don't know where they got this

idea -- they can't find what they really want to do

because they need to make money.

And I said, Well, I don't really

understand why, for some reason, all of the jobs

people would like to do are somehow

disproportionately underpaid. And I said, there

are lots of jobs for finance I wouldn't necessarily

want to do, but they make a lot of money.

And so, somehow, the education system

is teaching students along the way that the pursuit

of doing something you really want to do is not

economically viable. And I think that's the real

problem.

MR. WENGER: Well, I think that may well

be the reality for a lot of people.

MS. BOYD: If you look at the job market

in the United States, there's certain things we're

not going to export, and a lot of that is service

labor. And the fact of the matter is we do need to

put people to fill those jobs. And those jobs

aren't always fun. And so, how do we balance those

different dynamics?

I think it's great that we train and

educate people to really succeed and go and do the

things that they're passionate about. But I think

that if we only focus on that and we don't focus on

the reality of the labor market where not

everything is fun -- but we really want people to

clean our sewers, but that might not be the most

enjoyable job. But how do we actually create those

kinds of balances so that the fun might not be just

necessarily your job?

And there's certain things where

getting paid takes the fun out of it. I love

talking to people who are amateur chefs. And

they're amateur chefs because when they tried to go

and work in a restaurant, they hated it. It wasn't

fun anymore. And it was fun when they can cook for

their friends.

And so, how do we balance these kinds

of engagements where it's not just an obsession of

labor? And I think as American society, we obsess

over labor. And we obsess over making everything

without fun labor. That may not be the way the

society goes.

MR. L. JOHNSON: I'm not sure how this

is relevant to education, but I would point out,

what is wrong with serving fries? The notion of

serving people by cleaning their sewage systems or

serving fries is to be abuse and --

MS. BOYD: But it's a form of prestige.

It has no prestige, which makes it a miserable

experience.

MR. L. JOHNSON: Prestige is deep with

the abuse. And in education I think that's the

notion of -- I agree with a lot of what you said,

but the idea that service as a profession is

something that must be societally avoided is -- I

don't really get.

When I sold a company eight years ago,

I went to work in McDonald's because I felt I

needed to kind of connect with human beings. I was

spending too much time with investment bankers and

lawyers and such.

I would throw out one sentence. The

thing I'm most interested today, and I've talked to

Dave about this -- the idea of broadening the

notion of education to be a lifelong idea and

how the work that Paul -- the school, everything --

and Dave are doing around, saying that everyone's

got something to teach, everyone's got something to

learn.

We live in this crazy connected world,

how does education -- how do you expand education?

And I guess the other things which we're talking

about today is -- which I don't know much about

is -- it's just really hitting hard at the broken

public educational system and what to do about

that.

MR. WENGER: Let's think about that.

Let's just stick with that point, number one. Is

it the goal of education to enable people to find

the job that makes them happy? Or is it a goal at

a large scale to have people to somehow figure out

how they can lead happy lives even if they have

jobs that today they don't consider -- it's a very

fundamental difference on what we're going to wind

up focusing on, not for the education but for the

large majority, depending which of those goals.

MR. KALIN: There are now jobs out

there; that's the other part of it. I got my BA

and I taught my friends with similar degrees, and I

was studying literature at the time. My dad's

saying, "Go to go work in the book publishing

industry." And I saw my friends who had Master's,

Ph.D.s in the book publishing industry, and they're

doing alphabetizing, copy editing.

I started my own company because I

found that the only way to avoid wasting my

education --

MS. FLEMAL: But that's just this

moment. But I think the broader question and I

think it's good what you're saying, talking about

this expanding the concept of education, and what

Sir Ken is saying about, I don't know if he said

vocational, but also the cultural aspect and

personal aspect is that.

I work with families here in Manhattan,

what we do is we take kids off that track of,

whether they're 36 months or whether they're in

fifth grade or sixth grade, taking them off the

school track and bringing them home and home-school

them for a while and then whether they choose to go

back or not.

Parents will often say, okay, you know,

they are more concerned with sometimes the social

aspect than, what is my child really going to be

interested in academically? What is their real

interest academically? I.

Think people have gotten so caught up

in the social aspect of school that they've

forgotten really about what we're really there for,

that we're there to learn and we're there to find a

passion and maybe find a vocational skill, a useful

skill.

But this whole social piece that we're

getting in school, which is ultimately, I think,

secondary to everything else, has sort of taken

precedence. This social interaction of who likes

me and who doesn't like me, and all the other

things we see on TV.

So to think of the part of it that

brings the focus definitely to education is so

important. I'd love to hear more and learn more

and focus more about that.

MS. RHOTEN: Historically, education's

had three primary objectives (Inaudible.) Economic

development and vocational skill trainings. And

then human development, the ability to create and

ability to pursue what you are interested in and

have a sense of yourself.

I think we've lost two of the

(inaudible). There's too much pressure around the

question of vocational economic development. What

job will you get? What college will you go to?

The question of civic responsibility

into a nonformal learning institution, which I'm

currently spending a lot of time. And what I see

happening in the nonformal learning institutions

are development organizations that shoulder two

other areas of responsibilities. And they are

currently losing their ability to provide -- to

serve those two responsibilities.

Where are those going to be met? They

are not being met in the large part because of what

Sir Ken mentioned. The child left behind.

Hopefully, this administration will reverse that,

but that will not happen within the next

six months, I can assure you.

So, what I hope for in this

conversation and the work that all of you are

doing, is how can the private sector, along with

the public sector, try to bolster the missing

objectives and start school learning? If you can't

do that, I think we are in very, very deep trouble.

MR. WENGER: I know that Alex has taught

in schools.

What are the goals of the students?

MR. GRODD: Well, thank you for putting

me on the spot.

The goals of the students, I think it's

pretty universal, based on my experience with the

students and teachers, is to be cool.

Fundamentally, when you are a middle school child

and you are in a social setting where there's all

sorts of social pressures to fit in, I think the

driving force in the life of a child, starting much

earlier than it used to be, is to be cool, to fit

in, to be accepted by peers.

And so, that, it is a very compelling

force to the child. And so, when combined with the

fact that it also can be pretty universally it's

generally cool to be bad and it's cool to rebel,

and I think a lot of people in this room probably

have experienced those instincts.

It creates a lot of challenges for

teachers. And so, I don't know if that's where you

were going, but I think it is an important point

for me, as a teacher, in all this conversation, to

think about the fact that when you are alone in a

room with 30 11-year-olds -- and we can talk a lot

about personalized instruction and unlocking

creativity, but a lot of what need to take place --

to me, one of the fundamental flaws in our K-12

education now is the amount of discipline.

Teachers invest so much time, so much

energy trying to manage a class, and by the time

they've done that, there's so little energy to

actually differentiate the instruction, personalize

instruction.

So, I think that, to me, when thinking

about, how do we really get into the core of the

transformation, part of that is how do we create

systems of discipline, whether it's sort of

top-down, sort of authoritarian model that a lot

of charter schools I've taught in use, and a lot

more intrinsic sense of community. And it has got

to be both and it's got to be on the table.

That's one answer.

MR. L. JOHNSON: I think the cool thing

that's really important, when I look back on the

moments of my life, the periods of my life when I

actually felt in my educational development that I

was kind of, the most formative periods, they were

periods where, for whatever reason, I stumbled into

a peer group where the cool kids were the smart

kids.

It's kind of an intrinsic reward of the

group to be smarter and to be more passionate in

some way, to get to Sir Ken's idea, that the group

really rewarded people who really got obsessed with

something and has something, whether writing plays

or write short stories or doing art or whatever it

was.

And when you get to -- well, I think

about a parent and I just try to think about how I

can draw my kids towards kind of social groups,

where there is that intrinsic award, you're clever,

you are at the top of the pile, because you've done

that, that's really smart.

And I think that's one of the things

you see in kind of talking about hacking education,

kind of like a nerd culture. It's very valuable.

There is going to be an intrinsic award in that

society like whoever makes the best program are in

this group, like it is the coolest on some level.

And I don't know how you work that into an

educational institution, but it's an incredibly

powerful force.

MR. GRODD: Creating a school culture

wherein students were cool and smart is what very

few schools do in this country, one or two at best,

the best schools in the country --

MR. SACKLER: And it's very doable. You

do it through a series of programs so adults can

feel the... of the program to celebrate its

success... students and the hard work and teamwork

and initiative.

And just looking on those incentives in

place in a school for the kids, the kids respond,

in that culture. And I have seen that in every

great school I worked in.

It is not reasonably -- it is not done

idly... organizational discipline on these

teachers.

MR. WENGER: Try to jump in. People

queue up --

MR. RESNICK: They could be smart. It's

all about what you mean by "smart." But I think

the way that the culture is smart, it's

problematic. Well, I think the way -- I link this

with some of the earlier conversations, Sir Ken,

Jeff said, the word "create" came up a lot. And

part of what people wanted to do is to have their

voice heard, mainly develop their own voice. And

that's where a lot of the passion comes from,

developing your voice, because that's important, to

give you the opportunity to create, create the rule

of creativity. And we don't give enough

opportunities for people to create.

I think what we have seen is we've

started after school centers, the network of after

school; because the kids were unsuccessful at

school and uninterested in school and unmotivated

by the school. And then we said, lots of times --

create their own, you know, animations,

simulations, you know, other things you want to

hear to keep up their creating something.

It is not just you're seeing that as

intellectual leaders. When they're creating games,

when they're developing their voices, I think it's

both important to their personal life.

As Dana was saying, to be able to

express about -- personally, develop your voice

accordingly. And increasingly, I feel very

fortunate that in some way, I think we're lucky

that we're luck -- what I would want for people,

their personal life is better aligned with what the

society's needs and the economy's needs in the

past.

I would hope that if we were meeting a

hundred years ago, there would still be a part for

the development of personal expression and ability

to create. That is not well aligned with the

economy at all. Today it is better aligned, yet

there are some jobs -- there is a certain

percentage of jobs in rising creative paths, part

of the documented growing percentage.

So, there is this better alignment of

what is needed. I felt fortunate we have better

alignment of what is needed for personal

satisfaction and economic success. And yet still,

the system does not support the -- for the

development of letting the kids create design, to

be able to --

MR. ETUK: What I just want to say to

you is that going back, one of the goals are -- I

think that one of the goals have to be that

education has to evolve with the user; right? And

what I mean by that is that at the end of the day,

the format in which you present information right

now is everything that we used to believe with the

way to present information and shoving it down

kids' throats, and they don't like it.

What are the tools that can be created

for presentation that have input into that process

so that they can evolve as the kids evolve?

Today it might be something like

Twitter. Tomorrow it might be something explicitly

different. How does that information get back to

the system that lets teachers become the

facilitators, put knowledge in here that the

students then know how to work?

Does that make a lot of sense? I think

that's one of the things structurally we need to

build in.

MS. SHEFRIN: I wanted to just go back

for a minute to Peter Brooks. One of the things

that Peter said -- and when he was rehearsing, it

was an exercise with the actors. And he often

found that when they came to start work, they

actually weren't there, even when they were all

there.

And so, he would often do an exercise

called "double bond, double time" which was to do

the rehearsal in twice the normal speed of the

conversation, and go through that.

And what would happen in the course of

doing that was, of course, is that the subtext of

the play would all of a sudden become visible and

tangible through tonality and nuances in the voice,

in the speed.

Another exercise that he would do to

sort of get people there was a masking exercise.

And you just put everybody in a white mask. And it

allowed people to kind of arrive without their

personas there. And all of a sudden, this

imaginative space became rendered visible.

And I think some of the conversation

has a lot to do with how we create the conditions

necessary for imaginative space because I think it

is from that space that we move from transformation

to translation.

I'm not sure how my bio arrived on the

paper, but it didn't go through me and it didn't

say what I actually do. And just for the sake of

everybody's information, I would just like to say

that I'm currently the provost of the Rhode Island

School of Design, which has informed a lot of my

thinking about all of these things.

I think the relationship -- somebody

talked about skills and the necessity some skills,

somehow separate from thinking or making. And I

think -- I'd like to think about, and I understand

it from working with the students, the relationship

between making and thinking is that making is a

kind of thinking and thinking is a kind of making.

The idea of asking questions as opposed

to making questions, which I think the students are

engaged in.

I think how education is delivered has

changed dramatically; and I think it has started to

create another kind of path which has to do with

teachers teaching students, students teaching

teachers, teachers teaching teachers and students

teaching students.

And I think all of those things are now

occupying the same territory. And through those

different kinds of exchanges, they're all ways of

engaging imaginative space; which ultimately I

think really allows for the crossover from all of

these various domains, which opens up all kinds of

other possibilities.

MR. WENGER: Jump in, Ms. Salen.

MS. SALEN: I've been working on a

project to open a new school in the fall that's try

to tackle some of these questions. And what I

found in doing that is that there's a fundamental

tension between the ideas of education and the

notion of learning.

And I think that what we are really

trying to talk about is learning as the space of

innovation and transformation and not so much

education. Because we see innovation in the space

of learning all over the place today, in terms of

how people are coming to learn things, how people

are sharing information. We are not seeing

innovation in the space of education because of its

institutionalization.

So, I think that the space that we

really want to begin to understand is how learning

itself is a form of currency today for young

people. It's actually valued, and this is what you

were talking about.

Learning is actually valued in very

interesting ways by young people today; not so much

in school, but in spaces outside of school where

they're really learning how to do things. And it

goes to the conversation of, if one of our goals is

to allow people to move into a future; that they

are able to learn, able to adapt to any kind of

change, whether they're changing jobs, whether

they're changing what they're passionate about.

That, I think, is the best thing that we can do for

people is to give them that kind of skill set.

And so, for me, that, I think, is the

space of transformation -- it will get to

education, but it is so systemic, the problems with

education, that I feel like we have to come in the

back door. But if you talk to educators they say

they're in the learning business, but it is,

actually, they are not. You don't see that so much

when you get down to the nuts and bolts.

MR. BURNHAM: There's a great story that

comes out of your work with... and I think the

kid's name is Giapetto, the Brazilian kid who -- I

don't know if you've seen this piece of work. But

there is a Brazilian kid, I think, like 17 years

old who was passionate about animated music videos,

and there was nothing in the educational system

that he was in that would help him in any way to

figure that out.

But he found a site on the Web, began

to download the tools and figure out how to

manipulate the stuff and began to interact with

people on that site. He began to upload videos

that he created to that site. He was welcomed in

as a peer in that site, ultimately worked his way

up to the site to the point that he was respected

within that community and was beginning to educate

others who were coming into that community.

Eventually, his teachers figured out

that this kid knew how to edit video and asked him

to come back to the school system, and teach a

course on editing video. And all of that took

place with absolutely no infrastructure and no

support.

And I think that's what you are getting

at -- you're talking about something that was

self-directed, completely outside of the system,

but enabled by the medium that we are now all

swimming in and it either creates an opportunity to

help people learn even if we don't figure out how

to reform the system.

MR. CAULFIELD: I think there is an

important point there too, that comes back to the

peer group observations you were making. Something

that is relatively new is the ease of creating a

nonlocal reputation. This is something that's

available to a nine-year-old that wasn't available

before; that nonlocal reputation, that global

reputation of a niche reputation on the web.

In cases where the peer group influence

may be a little suffocating or a little limiting or

constricting, that can serve as a balance, as a

corrective, if it is encouraged, or sometimes if

not encouraged at all, it just happens.

And I think that's relatively -- I

think it's always hard to separate out in these

conferences what is new and what is really not new

but just sort of redundant. But I think it is

relatively new, the ease with which, especially

younger kids, can create global reputations and how

that can really broaden their sense.

I think that also related to Diana's

point, in that people now can have jobs which may

not be the best jobs, may not be the jobs that they

would prefer to have; and they still have an option

of pursuing, fulfilling artistic or academic life

with others on the Web, once again, through these

tools.

So, I may work this job, but I also

publish through Creative Commons, a bunch of folk

songs. And that may not have been an opportunity

before to actually have any sort of audience for

that.

MS. BOYD: Connecting this and Diana,

actually it's really important that we recognize

that status and validation and reputation are not

just means to get skill sets, but there's also

value that that is something that we actually

learn. We kind of forget how much we have learned

that until you see and you have to figure out to

negotiate the social world.

I mean, here we are in this environment

where there's a great deal of -- we want to be

smart, we want to be seen as cool in this room.

We're an environment that values that.

We're also in a room where people have

negotiated and networked their way to here. You

wouldn't be here if you weren't somehow connected

to other people in this room.

And one of the things that takes place,

especially at the teenage years, starting in middle

and high school, is that people actually learn how

to network; they learn how the social world works.

If you look at what they're doing on

the social network, such a lot of social media,

they're trying to make sense of those social

structures. Who your friends are, what happens

when you have to articulate the social dramas of

that? How do you make sense of social dramas?

We pooh-pooh this often as like

something that's fully irrelevant education, but we

all, as adults, rely on those skills, those very

social skills they've gotten us into this room,

that we have to learn.

One of the things that's sort of

scaring me is I'm looking at a lot of class

differences around the social network patterns and

whatnot, is that young people who are from

wealthier environments are actually encouraged to

network with people in other factors, other than

their schools, and with adults in very formal

situations.

Young people who are from more working

class environments are less likely to be encouraged

to network outside of their peer group and their

families. This has dramatic effects on their

abilities to get jobs and their abilities to find

validation and also other factors.

So, we ignore all of this sort of cool

stuff as sort of extra-curricular and unnecessary;

but we also might want to think of embracing it as

actually a set skills, that we all use it. And we

actually have networking classes as adults when so

much of that takes place at those formative years.

MR. WILSON: Dana, I want to read you an

e-mail. This is from a kid, an 18-year-old kid

named Michael Yuretcho, I never met him. He may

not go to college. He left a comment on the blog

post I read about a week ago, saying that a lot of

entrepreneurs don't go to college.

And he wrote a comment and he said,

"I'm not going to college, and I'm going to work

for a start-up."

In this e-mail, he said something

today, "Thank you. Fred, I really never got a

chance to say this, but thank you. I'm the kid who

commented on your post about successful

entrepreneurs and not going to college. From that

one comment, I had two job offers -- well, two

potential job offers."

(Laughter.)

"I was contacted a couple of days ago by

a friend of yours, Boris Wertz. I was also

contacted over Twitter by a guy from Boot-up Labs.

I'm meeting with both of themthis week. I want to

thank you for taking time out in your schedule to

e-mail some people."

I actually I only e-mailed one. The

other guy he contacted directly.

"I'm truly grateful that something came

out of this. So, it's because of you."

I wrote back to him, it's not because

of me, but because of him. He had the balls, an

18-year-old kid, to wade through a comment thread

brought between a bunch of creative, influential

people. He made a smart comment and found, as he

said, two potential job offers.

So, what you are saying is, that these

kids do know these networking skills. And they

figured this out; and I think there is a great

equalizer here. I don't know if the kid comes from

a wealthy background or not, but I'm not sure it

really matters. He just figured it out and weighed

in, left a comment, and he's making his way into

the world.

MR. JARVIS: Did his mother also e-mail

you?

(Laughter.)

MR. JOHNSON: He's dragging kids away

from college.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: To build on that,

there were a lot of other comments on that

connecting, because it's so impressive that you and

Dana pointing out that kids can network now.

But if we go back to what Sir Ken

started for us, you know, he asked a great

question: "What is at the heart of education?"

And actually, I'm using that tag '06,

because it is entitled "Schools, Skills,

Creativities" that he gave a tag in 2006. So, I

think he used it yesterday to jump off of a keynote

that I gave.

And the thing that I really like about

that is, what is at the heart of education? He's

talking about the child who is sitting in a

classroom and doodling and the teacher who is

passing by say, "Samantha, what is this?

She's looking at her and she's saying,

"It's a picture of God."

And the teacher says, "But no one knows

how God looks."

And that student says, "Well, in a

minute they will."

(Laughter.)

So, I think that's kind of at the heart

of education, as so many amazing comments are being

put there. And so, when you have that insight

about whether it's a picture of God or what is the

climate change or why is obesity happening and

anything that we want to kind of understand about

the importance of the First Amendment.

All these conflicts, things and

mathematics and physics and science that are out

there, I think what Sir Ken was trying to say is

that schools, as we know them today, are naturally

not enticing people or facilitating the kinds of

things we're even doing today; which is starting

from where the learner is and expressing the

learner's kind of ideas and allowing them to take a

stance and allowing them to express themselves and

allowing them to enter a conversation; preferably,

also as Mitch was going to ask, building something

that is expressing their ideas and growing it

through that social networking.

And I think what's at the heart of that

kind of education is very, very different than

what's at the heart of most of the education that

we see out there.

And I think it -- I don't know how

today is going to be, but as I finally figured out

how to unlock the fact that my comments are private

and participate in a twittering, not everybody here

is using it. Just like the the millions and

millions of kids out there, they don't know how to

use it.

So, they're not part of that

conversation with Fred or with many other people --

and I'm really worried about that because the

knowledge and skill that it takes to, first of all,

culturally be able to express yourself and then to

be able to participate in that social -- empowering

social media technology, is not available to all

equally right now.

And so, what's at the heart of that

education that we can all celebrate here is not

really accessible yet to a lot of people out there

in our nation, rural and poor communities, in urban

communities that don't have the benefits, that

don't have the tools.

And even if they do, they don't really

have the cultural ability to take the stance,

express themselves, connect to people below, above,

and on the side, and build stuff. And I think we

have to really worry about that here today. I hope

we will.

MR. KERREY: I'm going to add a little

about the politics of all this. Sir Ken had talked

about the 16,000 school districts, and that's where

governance occurs, and the civic responsibility and

cultural mission of the schools.

It is worth remembering that the

history of the common school in the United States

is a history of people attempting to pass state

laws mandating education at an early age, mandating

the creation of public schools.

And up until the 1920s, when there began

to be the a rise of the nativist movement, as a

result of the enactment of the openly racist

Immigration Act of 1924 and the creation of the

American Legion, that resulted in the rapid

expansion of public schools in the United States of

America for the purpose of teaching citizenship.

That's why the Pledge of Allegiance is

mandated in all schools. If one of your

11-year-olds is found out on the streets of Atlanta

this afternoon, they can be arrested and found in

the juvenile justice system for violating their --

as an offender of their status. They're required,

for approximately a thousand hours a year in all 50

states, to be in schools. So, that's the context.

Secondly, you've got to sort of imagine

yourself -- I have a 7-year-old in the largest

public school district in the country, the New York

public school system. If you're trying to have an

impact on PS41 where he goes to school, to put it

mildly, that's a hell of a challenge. Just to try

to have an impact upon the arrival of

air-conditioners in June, let alone the curriculum

and the budget and other sorts of things.

So, I think you have to separate the conversation

between the effort to improve the public schools

and the effort to improve the non-public school

environment. These are two completely different

things.

And finally, you have to get used to the

idea that you have to bring...

Session 2: Technology and Social Leverage on the Web

************************************

*** Hacking Education Transcript ***

*** Part: 2 of 4 ***

************************************

MR. KERREY (cont.): an argument inside

the context -- you haven't been in a room full of

parents. There are 2 million parents in the

New York public school system that might, I should

say, have a slightly different attitude about what

they want the New York public school system to

accomplish than I do.

And these board meetings can be raucous,

dispiriting and at times counterproductive. You

find yourself saying, Gee, I don't want to do that

anymore. You can find yourself fighting the battle

to get curriculum imposed and brought to the

schools and it's exactly what you wanted and,

two years later, the board of election occurs and

the people you supported get turned out.

As a great example, the state board of

education in Florida, not what I would consider

for the most part a backwater state, last year,

just voted to allow the theory of evolution to be

taught by five to four votes.

Kansas caught a lot of attention a

couple of years ago when they took a vote saying it

couldn't be taught. That got reversed again by a

five to four vote. So, there are arguments that

have to be brought, and you can't get timid in

bringing these arguments and you can't give up

after you have lost a battle.

But I think it's terribly important in a

discussion like this to separate the public school

argument, which is an intense one, from what you

want to occur outside of the school environment,

which oftentimes, in my view, is more important

than what's going on and mandated and brought

inside of the school.

MR. KALIN: But Bob, you can opt out,

couldn't you? You could home-school your kids and

then you're not breaking the law. You can do that;

right?

MR. KERREY: I broke into a cold sweat

earlier with Alex talking about facing 30

11-year-olds; and now you're talking about facing a

single 7-year-old all day long?

(Laughter.)

MR. WILSON: My point is this: Instead

of bringing an argument in this country, we could

simply have a revolution. We can simply take our

kids out of the school systems and come up with

alternate ways of teaching.

MR. KALIN: But they don't have the

framework that exists yet.

MR. RESNICK: There's are families -- a

single parent who is working round the clock. So,

how can they be doing that? It's fine for us to

say we can do it.

MS. RHOTEN: School is a safe place for

a lot of kids. It's not only the single parent

argument. But it's also the school represents the

eight hours of your day wherein you actually are

warm and have food. Not every kid can opt out of

that.

MR. SACKLER: The charter school -- the

district monopoly is being challenged all over the

country by the charter school. That's going to

open public education to enormous entrepreneurial

opportunities and energy; and it's happening in 41

states.

MR. BISCHKE: It's really up to us to

develop alternative models and set an example for

the public school system. And one of the

advantages of where we are today is that there are

lots of opportunities for initiatives to be

exploited of alternative models.

MR. HUGHES: I think that's exactly

right. I think there's a structural question here.

It says the classroom has 30 students and one

teacher in front of it. Even if it's for

eight hours a day and that's a safe place, that

just isn't working anymore.

And I think that what's really

interesting, what are the models in which teachers

can interact with students, and sort of adapt to

their different ways of learning throughout the

course of the day or throughout a year, so that

they actually are able to flourish and be happy and

also be good citizens.

MR. WENGER: This last bit of

conversation actually kind of prefigures the

structure of the day quite a bit. So, the

structure of the day -- I think this was very, very

good to start with goals.

It is clear even around this table that

it is not easy to come up with unanimous agreement

on what the goals might be. I think it's something

very, very important about learning. And we were

tempted to call this Hacking Learning, but it

didn't sound as good as calling it Hacking

Education; for that reason.

So, the structure of the day is that

actually -- after taking a short break now. We

will come back and talk first about how learning --

how hacking education can occur completely outside

of the existing system.

So, what are things that are happening,

what are tools, what is the leverage available to

us today, and maybe shortly? And then after lunch,

bring that back to the point that Bob was raising

about.

So, then, there's the schools. So,

there are things outside of schools which are

already taking place; and what is the interface

between old and new and how does that happen? That

will be the focus of the afternoon.

MR. GORDON: I wanted to throw something

out. I've asked people for a decade and I've never

heard a good answer.

Has anybody ever seen a coherent

description or definition of what "well-educated"

means, that they didn't write themselves?

(Laughter.)

If so, I would love to be pointed at it.

Because I haven't heard one, even in universities.

I have asked what a great university head is and

got a 50-page speech from Rick Levin, about the

president of Harvard in the 1800s; but I've never

seen a definition of "well-educated."

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I don't know if we

want that --

MR. KERREY: I have something written in

1905 with several great descriptions of what

"well-educated" means; not by me, but somebody

else.

MR. KALIN: You can be dead and

well-educated would be a question? It's not

static, staying in one place.

MR. JARVIS: It's different for

everyone. We do have to write our own. If we

don't want to write it, that's a different

question. Chicken/egg, but it has to be -- the

problem is that we'd make every student take the

same frigging test and come up with the same

frigging answers. That is no way for a creativity

to begin.

But it comes out of the idea that there

is a definition of "well-educated." The same way

that there's this mass view in news, if there is

one newspaper that can serve, everyone is the same.

It's absurd.

MR. GRODD: I will only say that I've

been part of many, many of those conversations, but

I think, on a fundamental level, kids need to read,

write and do math. They need to know how to read,

they need to know how to write and they need to

know basic math.

So, after that, then critical thinking,

and the holistic concept of an educated

humanitarian; I think that is all relevant, and I

would love to participate in that, but

fundamentally, there's millions of children who

can't read, can't write, can't do math.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But the problem is

that the way to reach the literacy, the old

literacy of reading, writing and arithmetic that

you're talking about, has new methodologies. And

so, that's really the fundamental thing we are

discussing today.

And probably, it's not just one

definition, but many, and many ways for different

people to really reach that literacy. But there

are also a lot of new literacies; your ability to

imagine something and make it up, express yourself

with media, remixed media, participate in media

like the one we're using today.

I wonder how you would use what we are

posting. I'm trying to generate a lot of noise --

MR. WENGER: I think one of the great

things, I keep looking up there (indicating

overhead projection). It's other people already

not in this room, so --

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But how are we

going to integrate that into the conversation,

because sometimes people summarize what's being

said and sometimes they comment on what's being

said, how are we going to model, how this can be

used effectively? It's hard to use it effectively

in a conversation.

MR. WENGER: That's going to take us to

the next session. We'll take a five-minute break

for people to grab a coffee, go to the bathroom.

And there are sign-up sheets over there for lunch,

and we're having a self-organizing lunch called

"Birds of a Feather."

So, there's five topics that people

have already created. So, if you don't like the

topics, there's room to create a sixth topic or add

more sheets also. And then we're going to have to

continue in about ten minutes.

(Time noted: 11:15 a.m.)

(Time noted: 11:30 a.m.)

As I have promised earlier, we are going

to try to start each section off with a little

video. And so, this is a video on YouTube.

(Discussion off the record.)

Check this out, and we'll put links out

on Wiki. But here is why this caught our

attention, to preface this section. This section

is all about how is learning occurring, how do we

get leverage on learning from technology? How do

we get social leverage from the web for learning?

And, actually, leaving existing schools aside,

until the afternoon.

And this is a kid, clearly, maybe a 14-

or 15-year-old kid, who put this video up

explaining how to do something to have a blendered

water effect. So, one of the great things is that

this video's been viewed almost 50,000 times.

There are a lot of responses that actually explain

how to do it better, including video responses that

show how to do this.

And I think that it is, in my mind, a

great illustration of how this can happen. And so,

Bob, we'll use that as a kick-off point for how can

technology provide leverage in learning in both

technology leverage and social leverage.

MR. WILSON: I wanted to ask

Jim Rosenthal a question. Jim is a long time

friend of mine who runs a piece of Kaplan's

business. Do you teach adults professional

education -- your business teaches adults

professional education on the Web; right?

MR. ROSENTHAL: On the Web and in

school.

MR. WILSON: What percentage is online,

and what percentage is in schools?

MR. ROSENTHAL: It varies, probably more

than 50 percent in schools, but it's moving in the

other direction; faster in the U.S. than overseas.

MR. WILSON: You actually give people

degrees? You give people accreditation via online

classes?

MR. ROSENTHAL: Yes. I'm not granting

degrees, although Kaplan University certainly does.

My area is test prep for real estate and financial

services, for insurance, for accounting.

MR. WILSON: And are these live classes

that they participate in? They log in and a

there's a teacher sitting there?

MR. ROSENTHAL: Yes, there's live

scheduled classes. And all of those are archived.

So, you can go back. Or if it doesn't work,

reschedule, you can go and check it all. It's

always online.

MR. WILSON: Is there any data about the

performance of -- in the tests of the people who do

the learning online versus the people who do it

face-to-face?

MR. ROSENTHAL: I know what you are

looking for, but I don't have it.

MR. KALIN: Do you think that the

founders of YouTube, said we're going to reinvent

education?

MR. ROSENTHAL: No.

MR. KALIN: But they do more to change

the way education works than anybody in this room

right now, and that's something --

MR. WENGER: Speak for yourself.

(Laughter.)

MR. KALIN: In terms of reaching people,

gauge it in terms of purely numbers. I'm sure that

people would qualify it. So, I think that's the

beauty of the Web and technology. You don't create

a pedagogical -- you just created the tools for

them to teach each other.

MR. L. JOHNSON: Think how much more you

could have a learning paradigm, based upon the

content --

MR. HUGHES: There's Twitter and

Facebook; you learn all types of social

information. The vast majority might be that, but

it doesn't mean that doesn't tell you something

about the sender or what that means for you

socially and that doesn't mean you don't

necessarily learn about content.

I think the challenge is in figuring

out the technologies, and the one's that are

existing and the ones that are coming into the

classroom -- which was, what I was trying to get at

earlier, the structural problem is that a teacher

in front of 30 people with no computers, it will

not work anymore.

MR. WILSON: Albert, Brad and I and, I

think, Andrew and Eric here all sat with an

entrepreneur, probably about four or five months

ago, who had taken YouTube, just brought it in and

built a layer on top of it, and was delivering

English language learning to Chinese kids.

And they were doing it in internet

cafes. They would -- it's basically somewhat like

a game. Kids would go into an internet cafe in

China and they would watch popular YouTube videos

and they would try to say the words in English.

And then they would record it and then they would

get rated by other kids.

So, basically, it just took the raw

material that's already on YouTube, pop on the

videos, put a little technology layer on top of it,

and they were teaching millions of Chinese kids how

to speak English.

MR. ROSENTHAL: It's a better version of

how they used to learn it, which is by just going

to the movies.

MR. GORDON: I'll ask Lewis. You helped

invent a pretty good after action review. So,

there's kind of pedagogical -- teaching that's

automated, without humans involved. What did you

learn from doing that? How do we take humans out

of the scalable education process?

MR. L. JOHNSON: The goal wasn't to take

humans out of the loop. But so people understand,

we've created video games, help people learn a

foreign language. And part of our rationale is

that we weren't satisfied by the type of

interaction we saw in the classroom, for obvious

reasons; nor were we satisfied with the type of

interaction that we saw on the Web, which typically

presumes a certain level of language proficiency

and tends to be text-based, whereas a lot of

learners have difficulties speaking the language.

So, we saw a lot of value helping people

get up to the point where they can utilize these

other technologies to help learn. But just to say,

here you go on YouTube and learn from that, I'm

glad to see that that is having so much success.

But I think there are a lot of kids who aren't

reached well, skills that aren't well-taught just

by relying on the technologies out there.

MS. SALEN: I want to build on that a

second, because I think one danger is to start to

begin to imagine that learning happens in

isolation, that there is a single platform or a

single tool that is going to teach. Learning is

ecological, and it happens in many places

simultaneously.

So, I was talking to a parent last week

about a model of sort of nodal learning, and

thinking about what are the configurations of

spaces that we are making available for kids to

learn in and across? And he wasn't understanding,

mostly because I was not communicating well.

And I said, "Let's talk about your

daughter. I know she loves to play basketball.

So, where did she learn to play basketball?"

And he said, "Well, she learns at

practice."

I said, "Oh, but I bet she talks to you

at home about it."

He said, "Yeah."

And I said, "I bet she has conversations

with her friends about it on the phone and they

work through plays. Does she ever go online? Does

she watch basketball games? Does she go to

basketball games?"

He said, "Yeah, yeah, she does all those

things."

And I said, "Well, yeah, learning is

happening across all of those spaces."

And so, what I think we want to begin to

understand is, what are the kinds of

infrastructures that we need to build to help

leverage the movement of that child across those

kinds of learning spaces?

And it may be the invention of certain

kinds of technologies, but I think there's larger

things, what Dana was talking about in terms of how

do we enable social capital for kids? What are the

mechanisms by which we make that possible? How do

we enable just connectors between some of these

different spaces, whether they're content

connectors or mentor connectors or even a

validation that what a kid might be doing in an

after-school space is relevant and valid within an

in-school space?

So, I think we need to remember the

configuration and the ecological question because

we're in a networked world. Our model of learning

has to exist within that certain networked idea, as

well.

MR. HEIFERMAN: Can we articulate more

about what problems need solving? And why isn't it

just the Web? Why isn't this solving this problem

all by itself?

MR. HERROD: What other questions?

MR. BISCHKE: I think one thing is

there's a big disconnect between learning and

credentials. And so, we're moving to a world where

you can learn anything; you can go to Yale and you

can watch their courses as you can do all different

types of things, but the credentialing system is

one that hasn't changed at all.

And I think there's been a few people

who have written some very interesting stuff, I

know Fred a little bit, about how can you look at

whether the testing is standardized testing,

whether it's degrees, accreditation, and change

that system? Because without that, the rest of

this stuff is not nearly as meaningful.

MR. WILSON: My son is a big video

gamer. He understands credentialing in a video

game, and he knows what his score is. And he knows

what his friend's score is and he knows that he's

better than anybody else at Caller Duty 5.

When he gets credentialed in school, he

goes home and say, "Dad, it's not fair, you know.

I got such and such on a test. And this kid

didn't -- he went up after class and had a chitchat

with the teach. All of a sudden he ended up with a

better grade than me."

And he appreciates the raw power of

Caller Duty 5. I beat that kid one on one, you

know. And he didn't get it in school.

MR. GORDON: There are a couple of other

parts to video game credentialing. So, one is

having more parallel reward paths is useful. Video

game credentialing has to succeed by motivating.

And clearly, academics don't stay in power by

motivating, but have to succeed by motivating. And

so, there is a feedback loop and it has to be

considered fair.

But a video gaming system, that's the

most motivating, it's going to have four or five

parallel tracks, the motivation of all clients, all

on different time cycles.

MR. WILSON: But that means you can get

your scores in different ways?

MR. GORDON: People that are playing,

are usually playing, trying to accomplish a couple

of different things, usually that have different

time cycles. You want something that takes

one minute and something that takes a month.

MR. S. JOHNSON: When I think about the

skills that I had that I got when I was a young kid

that are still valuable, I think back to when I was

10 or 11 when I spent thousands of hours playing

baseball games and designing better baseball games.

And I got a huge amount out of that in

terms of the map that are creating the whole

statistical model of how baseball works and stats,

and a lot of collateral learning experience,

building simulations and things like that that

they're using to this day.

But the most important thing about that

was, I think I learned how to be obsessed with

things. There's another way of saying that, which

is passion. I got obsessed with these things and I

had a series of stages in my life where I got

obsessed with something else. And I just immersed

myself to learn as much as I could. And it's that

mechanism I used again and again and again in my

professional life.

So, how do you teach kids to be

obsessed with things? I think one of the

advantages we have with technology and particularly

with games is that they have built-in structure,

almost to a fault, as most parents would say.

They have an addictive quality where people will

just immerse themselves and become obsessed with

them, something in that structure.

When you look at the games that most of

these kids are playing, the amount of information

that they have to accumulate and master to perform

well in these games is a mess compared to the

amount of information they're willing to reinforce

to learn at school.

And so, somehow, there's something in

this formula, this kind of platform, without

anybody telling them to do it, they are going out

learning all this information and becoming really

skilled at it.

So, they have to kind of figure out

what is the cocktail there that's allowing them to

do that, and then maybe take that and actually,

causing them to learn other things that perhaps

they aren't getting from the games.

MR. CAULFIELD: One of the things that

differentiates some of those activities is that the

referee in the interaction, in the coaching, are

separate. That allows, I think, for a much more

intensive experience than one where people feel the

game is rigged.

And so this person goes and talks to

the referee and gets a better grade. My daughter

plays Castle Crashers incessantly. And she is on

the headset to her friends and she's trying to pull

up YouTube videos to figure out how to get the

achievements.

But the sense is that here's her

interaction. And then there's a separate sort of

referee that is somehow objective. So, she's not

playing to the referee.

For me, one of the moments of teaching

that really got to me is when I was teaching

English composition and you tell students, Oh, it

was a 90. So, you did gun control essays and

things like that.

And so, we go through rhetoric and at

the end of class, you say, "Write your gun control

essay." And one of the students comes up and says,

"What's your thoughts on gun control?" And I feel,

"silly student." Come on, you know. "You're not

writing this for me. You're writing for your

audience." And he says, "I'm writing it for the

grade, so doesn't that mean the audience is you?"

And I realized that yeah, it's a fraud,

you know. It's really kind of scam that we're

perpetrating here. And so, I think things

where those two things are separated, where there's

a separate referee and a separate coach allows the

referee to be more fair, allows the coach to really

focus on the success of the student.

The referee doesn't have to be this

abstract rule-based thing. The referee can just

help someone engage with an audience as a writer.

MS. BOYD: But are referees always fair

outside of games? When I was in Brown, I was

obsessed with who was succeeding and who wasn't at

Brown. I went and talked to the dean about what

was going on, how things are playing out.

And one of the things I found out

really quickly is that the people who are doing

best at Brown are those who figured out how to bend

every rule available to them. They figured out

what rule was there, they figured out how to work

around it and how to leverage the different people

to get what they wanted.

And people view it as almost a game in

and of itself. And one of the things that's

been -- in talking to people who do research on

kids with autism, there is this set of rules where

we can sit and formalize it. We can create and

formulate structures and we can say this is how you

succeed and this is how you avoid.

And certain kids, such as kids along

the autistic spectrum, do tremendously well with

this set of rules. Other kids do extremely well

when given the set of rules, figuring out how to

work around it.

And there's this interesting thing to

your son's point. I totally agree that the school

system isn't fair. But how may of you have tried

to get a raise at work? Is that process fair? Is

that process about who is getting rewarded in a

direct manner that you can evaluate, or is it about

figuring out how you can ease around and manipulate

that to get that raise?

And so, each of these are different

skill set, and we can't say one skill set is better

or worse than another, but how are we thinking of

it in the ecology of saying, "These are the things

that we want to mix in; and some kids learn to

figure out which personalities are going which

way." But if we go for one system or another, we

end up breaking down.

And if we want a more fair system, we

have to think about a more fair adult society, not

just a more fair kid society.

MR. RESNICK: I want to make sure we're

not too drawn into everything being driven by some

evaluation how well you succeeded or whether it's

the highest score in the game or an award from the

teacher; just to give a different paradigm as

opposed to some people are motivated by their high

score in the game.

But there's another paradigm that

flourishes today, the maker community, the do it

yourself community. There's a huge maker fair

going on. And people don't go there to get the

award with the best exhibit at the maker fair.

They build what they're excited about. They became

obsessed with something and they want to share it

with others, to get feedback from others. Wow,

that's incredible. That's the excitement, and to

see what others have done.

So, I just want to make -- not that the

paradigm is right for everybody or for all

contexts, for all people. But at some point we get

too drawn into what's the best way of getting for

the competition paradigm, just a little overblown.

MR. GORDON: We did this in .

Once you find that there are people who want to

share, you can give them a more rewarding

experience if you give them a platform to share on.

And they feel like there's a chance you're going to

be looked at.

So, I would argue that something like

Etsy or craft fairs are platforms that can be more

motivating, because when people are halfway done,

they think, If I just finish, I've got a way to

share. So, creating platforms that seem like open

ways to share, I think, are another way to

motivate.

MR. RESNICK: Yes. I agree. This is

true. To promote my own thing a little bit, we

have this project called Scratch, where kids are

programming their interactive stories and games and

sharing online which, there are more than a

thousand new projects each day. And kids see what

others are doing and then making things together,

just open, they grab what others have done, remix

and add other things.

There is some external motivation, the

ones that get featured on the home page where lots

of other people are using it.

MR. GORDON: And they probably have to

believe that there's fairness in deciding who gets

top of the box and how you get to remix somebody

else's stuff. So, that's the referee, which

doesn't necessarily have to be a person.

THE SPEAKER: I'm going to plug the

Scratch program that Mitch and his group created.

So, we're doing an experiment in Hawaii, and I'd

love to get feedback. We're finding kids to be

very passionate about making their own games and

there's all kinds of good learning stuff for these

kids, measured quantitatively and also -- this is

what I made. This is where I want to go.

We've run these after school programs

with Scratch, kids make their own games. Some of

the games and some of the themes are, make games

that are about math or about creating stories. You

can tackle any kind of learning with this sort of

tool.

Essentially, it's world making. You

define your own world, what's important to you, and

you share it with kids that are in this group

together. And we've got coaches, older kids who

have gone through it and are now teaching the

younger kids. To me, it's really working. And I

would love to propagate that.

But I think the approach that Mitch

talks about for having -- I guess your phrase is

"playful invention." And I think that's what going

on in these courses. And I think that's what goes

in internship. And I think that's what leads to

new cultural developments.

MR. BURNHAM: The product is becoming

the credential. In the old days, I went to school,

I got a grade, I presented the grade and I got a

job. And now, what happens is, you create this

game; and that game is what creates your

reputation. And there's no grade there.

And it's not important, because you've

created a great game and hopefully, that game is

bubbled up to the top of the board, because others

have linked into it.

And if you think about the Web as a

medium in a way, that's the way people are creating

their own credentials. It has a lot to do with how

many links there are into your blog, into your

voice, into your opinion about what's going on in

the world.

And I think it's fundamentally changing

what we need from education, to Scott's question.

What we need is to become familiar with the tools

that we use to promote our ideas and really,

basically, to search engine optimize our products

or the things we created. And I think that's what

people are doing.

MR. JARVIS: They have a faith in the

marketplace and the marketplace, which I share.

But, you're from the educational world, and it

says -- the authority says this is right and that's

success. A game world shows some danger and it

systematizes a one victory, one definition again.

I prefer creation as a new framework,

personally. But how do you certify that? I also

like the idea of the public doing it, but there's

some danger there, too.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I think we are

developing methodologies that you are describing,

that Mitch is describing, that we're doing. I

think Katy's doing a lot of that kind of work.

There are several people in the room that are

really working very hard to create an assessment

that relates to imagination, innovation,

creativity, coming up with an idea, beginning a

project from the beginning, middle, end; delivering

this in digital form, sharing, exposing,

presenting.

All of us are trying to transform

education through those playing games or making

games and doing both which is the new reading and

writing. I think they're working very hard and

there's a lot of research out there for assessments

that are beginning to work.

I'm right now working with 350 students

and teachers in 14 schools. They are using it,

they are evaluating it in a whole new way. And

it's project-based daily --

MR. JARVIS: The assessment may be less

thinking of a product than a process, and saying

we'll make this better and better and better.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: Both. The

assessment is about the process, it's about the

product and even about how it relates to other

grades. It relates to the content of what the

games of the teamwork or the project is about.

There are ways. And I want people to know that

there are ways to do it. And it works. It works

on the ground.

MR. KALIN: How many people here have

hired people? How important is what degrees you

have in terms of hiring? If you hire an engineer,

you want to see samples and quizzes and tests.

There were people who were doing the media stuff

for Etsy, they have a site and video showing videos

you've made. I don't care what degrees these

people have. It's something that's becoming less

and less meaningful in the job marketplace, as

well, and you talk so much about how important the

degree is in getting a job.

But talk to people who are creating

jobs right now. There may be degrees that are

important for people who want to work at Citibank,

but Citibank isn't exactly hiring right now.

MR. L. JOHNSON: I care about degrees

for the people I hire.

MS. FLEMAL: I can think of someone

right now, an artist who did so well with her

videos on YouTube that she took a site on... and

delivered lessons and the students did incredibly

well and has quite a business for herself. She has

no given credentials, at all.

MR. KALIN: She has lots of

credentials in the eyes of other people, I'm sure.

-

MS. FLEMAL: But her credentials are --

what I'm saying is, we were talking about giving

credentials in terms of degree and so forth. It's

exactly what she needed to present. And she has a

huge audience and a huge business.

MR. WENGER: There are a couple of

different things about how technology provides

leverage -- provides leverage, because it allows

you to publish your work product and allows more

objective referees. It's about a new form of

credentialing.

I wonder, in this section, what other

types of leverage does technology provide us?

MR. GORDON: When I've taught classes, I

throw this out for somebody else to use, tell the

students you can't get an A from the teacher. The

best you can get from the teacher is a B+, because

the teacher-student grading relationship is

corrupting.

So, if you want to get an A, you've got

to get somebody outside. And in a video game

class, you got to get 10,000 downloads as an A. I

would suggest in journalism, somebody's doing

entrepreneurial journalism, that you've got to get

a certain amount of blog readers per a month to get

an A and --

MR. JARVIS: Which I love, but there's

the Paris Hilton factor.

(Laughter.)

I still like it. There is a corruption

there, too.

MR. GORDON: I had one student get to a

million in a month. So, that, a million downloads.

That was an A.

MR. JARVIS: With what?

MR. RESHEF: Technology does enable us

to bring education everywhere. And that's

something we should remember because, if you look

at the world, most of the world doesn't have the

proper tools and system.

And technology enables us to overcome

and reach most -- not necessarily most of the

people yet, but many people that were unable to get

education and get proper education.

Second, we're talking about the school

system. Education basically makes schools what

they have been for the last few hundred years; a

place for the kid to go, stay out of the street and

for the parent -- to enable the parent to go and

work. They work in a babysitting place.

Now, we had a notion that they get --

the teachers -- we used to consider the teachers as

the source of the knowledge. Well, I'm not sure if

they ever were, but definitely they're not right

now. And the technology enables the kids to go and

get all the information that they need outside of

the classroom.

I think that one of the main problems

that we're facing right now is that the school

system resists this change. And the school system

refused and says, "Okay; we still have a rule.

Without a rule in the school, it will be totally

different than what it used to be."

And the information the kid should get

somewhere else, maybe bring it to school, maybe use

it in school, maybe exchange knowledge between the

students, but get it somewhere else. And I think

that that's where the school system is now fighting

all over the world, staying as it used to be and

there will be a real change in the next few years,

because it can't stay as it was.

MR. WENGER: We'll trying to get back to

the schools in the afternoon. But you made the

point, one, the key to technology leverage is

access, simple access. You can read an article and

be anywhere else in the world, and that's a big

technology leverage that we didn't have.

MR. ETUK: One of the things, and I

think they're related to, is the ability to

increase what we call efficiency to learn, when the

kids start to teach each other. That also has an

effect on labor costs, because if you don't have to

spend as much on teachers, the normal one teacher

and twenty students, thirty students; if you create

these multi-user environments and start to help

each other, it's four or five kids.

One of the big things that we saw

during the educational games was, high school

students love to teach the younger kids and get

points and credit for that. It's one of those

things if you could leverage that, you can actually

tap in and you'll fight with the teacher

federation; because you can actually either reduce

the number of substitute teachers, which is an

economic impact.

MR. KERREY: To be specific on the

question of leverage. You can see how leverage is

occurring in one big area, and that's in the

library. And you can see it either in the higher

education environment or the on public side, in

public libraries, where librarians themselves are

increasingly use technology to leverage access.

And universities, for example, they're not building

libraries like they used to. Our libraries have

become Starbucks or the library becomes wherever

the student is moving with a wireless tool.

We're using software increasingly to

get students access to materials, and it's leading

the university to change substantially, largely

through the open curriculum issue. It's leading

students in a different direction than before.

But if you want to see the leverage of

the technology, this kind of technology, any

library you go into today, talk to students about

what they are doing and see where it is going.

The other thing I wanted to address is

Fred's question about home-schooling. Because I do

think, at some point, as uncomfortable as it may be

to get them to examine these sort of things, I do

think there is a question of different kinds of

regulatory structure that needs to be addressed.

In fact, in the old days, it was

entirely appropriate to say I'm going to have a

roll at the local school and that's as far as it's

going to go. But the problem is today the students

have migrated way beyond the localities, and you

really can't allow -- I don't think -- I think the

regulatory structure of both the K to 12 and the

post secondary levels, is limiting the use of

technology, particularly in the home environment.

And leaving aside for the moment, Rob's

argument that credentials don't really matter,

credentialing is still -- and the question about

whether or not I get credit or not -- I just played

a multiplayer game.

I know a language, let's say, I

acquired a language question is, is there a

regulatory structure that allows me to be tested

and get a credit for that without having to enroll

in some institution, an accrediting institution

that satisfies the middle stage, that stage in

Nebraska, or wherever.

I think we need to have to get into the

regulatory environment, because I think the

regulatory environment today, unless it's changed,

will continue to frustrate and limit the leveraging

capacity you can have with technology.

MR. KALIN: You don't need a board of

people to say, this is the legit, let's just put it

out there. It's up to the people to judge it.

MR. KERREY: I love your free spirit.

(Laughter.)

MR. KALIN: What is the accreditation

issue?

MR. KERREY: Is it a rhetorical question

or a real question?

MR. KALIN: It is a body of people that

are elected to a board and have --

MR. KERREY: If the regulatory structure

comes off, the law, the laws are passed that people

pass, specific law would have to be changed. And

the barriers to the law are the institutions that

don't want the barriers to be limited.

I will give you a very specific

example. Let's say you value the degree as you

were going through the school system, and you did

pay for a course at MIT. And you were at MIT and

wanted to transfer somewhere else.

Now, the transferring entity, the

entity you're transferring into, is making its

decision about whether or not it wants to accept

you. It's a tremendous barrier and it's allowed

under the law, unless the law changed. So, the

barriers themselves, the regulatory barriers, are

creatures of law. They begin with the law and the

law hasn't changed. The laws were written at a

time when none of this was possible.

MR. KALIN: And your schools follow

laws?

MR. KERREY: Yes.

MR. KALIN: If I'm at the School of Fine

Arts and want to transfer to the New School, I

found out the School of Fine Arts weren't

officially accredited.

MR. KERREY: The challenge of operating

an institution, you have to follow the law.

MR. WENGER: I want to come back to the

discussion about changing the existing

institutions, later in the afternoon, and just talk

more broadly about what we are seeing in technology

today.

But I would love to hear from David,

because we are using a lot of technology and the

school is going to impose it.

MR. WILEY: I was going to say we are

doing something in the school that we're opening in

the fall, an online high school. But it is

ridiculously simple. It seems to me it was

radical, as well. In terms of using technology as

a leverage point, by taking content and assessments

in the system that we are using, the students work

within and there is an alignment ofto standards.

We can do this completely revolutionary

thing in giving a student a pretest and then

pulling out the materials that they already know

and creating a personalized path instead of

four weeks training, maybe, let's say, two and a

half or maybe, let's say, three weeks in one and a

half. Maybe you finish the course in a four-week

period instead of the whole semester.

The idea then of a pre-test, based on

what the students already know, is older than dirt,

probably. But this is one place that technology

gives us a leverage point. With something as

simple as aligning the assessment with the content

and the standard in the middle to connect them to

each other. Pre-assessment, pass the standard, and

I'll just pull the content out to build path for

you.

MR. KALIN: The teacher can give the

student a test on the first day of class.

MR. WILEY: But this is much more

efficient way to do it.

MR. BURNHAM: You can't deliver

personalized curriculum after the fact. Once

you've done the testing, the teacher can't handle

that.

MR. JARVIS: The test should be

reversed. We should test what we need to know

rather than what we supposedly know. It should be

entering into the process rather than coming out of

the process. We are so tied up in certification.

It doesn't feed education, in fact, it stifles it.

MR. L. JOHNSON: There's something

called Time dollars, time banking. It's like

helping each other out like community service,

there is a trading of dollars. There is something

that feels wrong about time making and time

dollars. It feels wrong. It is like it is sort of

certification of credentials or learning as we have

been talking about.

Even the words "product" and

"marketplace" don't feel right, that people -- that

if I get 10,000 downloads in my thing, does that

mean I'm more virtuous than the thing that only

gets 5,000 downloads? That sort of a metrication

of everything, net certification, that thing, and

it can be dangerous in that way.

But ultimately it is -- I think what is

ultimately important is, are you -- it doesn't feel

right. It is just -- ultimately, like the value on

creativity and that sort of self expression,

personal expression.

But simply like -- sorry to repeat the

phrase I said before -- but like to be of use, to

be helpful to other people, or let's say, this is

an era of responsibility. These are things that

ultimately are hard to measure and are about norms

and mores and virtues that are not game-like, but

yet have real material like -- my credibility, my

trust with people I love and who love me and who

care about me are grounded in that, but not

grounded in a point system.

And that happens naturally within

communities. That happens in -- some of you know

the work of Douglas Rushkopf, who just wrote a

book. I just read through it. It was fascinating.

He talks about how -- you become obsessed about how

people are following you on Twitter. I hate the

idea that I am becoming obsessed with how many

people are following me on Twitter.

(Laughter.)

It is a measure of my worth. And

that's not good. That's not an argument for

quality over quantity and all of that bullshit I

usually spew about this kind of thing. It is

really, you know, who are you, what are you good

for, and it does not necessarily like, you know,

amassing the point and the followers. I wish I had

a more --

MR. KALIN: We're talking about

assessment, the education lingo fo assessment.

Today you are still talking about that type of

tests for assessment. Assessment is one thing

that's more qualitative and less quantitative.

This should take years to develop.

MR. WILEY: Let's be clear. How about

the role of what the role of credential is; right?

Just pop up the level of abstraction and say, if

you have got one or two or three or four people

that you wanted to evaluate, you can get into the

material that has been produced and you can do a

firsthand evaluation and hire someone.

But when you've got thousands of people

or -- when you're trying to scale this kind of

decision, there is a mission decision or a hiring

decision. We are trying to scale some kind of a

high stake decision. You don't have -- you can't

efficiently go in and do a firsthand evaluation,all

the artifacts made by all the people over all the

lifetime, things you have done related to the

decision we are trying to make.

What we want is, we want a supposedly

objective third party to give you some proxy

statement, some statement that you have some

confidence in about the ability or the expertise.

MR. L. JOHNSON: Do I want the doctor

who is most certified, or the doctor who has the

most followers on Twitter?

(Laughter.)

MR. O'DONNELL: If you have other

doctors who are followed by other doctors, then

that to me is worthwhile.

MR. L. JOHNSON: That was a loaded

question.

MR. WILEY: This is why certification

and credentialing isn't going away. We need a way

to scale high stakes decisions in an efficient

manner.

MR. KALIN: Use technology, not a third

party board.

MR. WILEY: I'm not saying we have to

keep doing credentials in the same kind of way.

MR. WENGER: But I am trying to bring it

back to the question: What are the technologies

out there today that let us learn better, more

easily than ever before? And what, if anything, is

missing from that?

MR. ROSENTHAL: Albert, you are asking

what technology leverages. And the way I think it

leverages fantastic is, terrific, passionate

teachers. If I have passionate teacher Ph.D.s in

La Crosse, Wisconsin, who love CFAs.

With a credit card and a broadband

connection, you can be anywhere in the world, and

start learning from them in a minute. It's

incredibly powerful.

And to bring it down to the public

school, something that excites me, again, we are

very far from -- what Bob was talking about; when

we think of a backwater school system, that for

whatever reason, can't attract anybody good to

their math department. So, for whatever reason,

everybody in third grade math is poorly educated

and isn't learning math.

Now, if you could figure out -- and

this isn't as simple as some of my colleagues here

would like it to be -- if you could figure out how

to wipe out the department and put in a computer

and broadband connection into each kid's homes, all

of a sudden, they can be learning from unbelievably

passionate teachers anywhere in the world.

MS. BOYD: Technology does not determine

practice. I can give you any set of technologies

and find educational ways of using it, and I can

give you any set of technologies and find

dreadfully noneducational uses of it.

And so, just shoving broadband into a

group of kids, just giving them an iPhone, we can

think of a gazillion designs that are valuable.

Wiki, it is pretty useful for that.

But if you would have a culture that is

not embedded in it, this becomes just another toy

you can text your friends with.

And so, how do we actually think about

technology, not just as technologies themselves but

within that sort of ecology of how you actually

make this leverage work and to make it work for

you. Teachers are critical for this.

It is actually not learning from

teachers in another environment, but figuring out

how teachers can give you and work with you to

understand how you engage with these technologies

to do something important.

So, there are infrastructures, there

are definitely gateways, but they need to be

imbedded within a broader system. One of the

things I've been so infinitely frustrated with is,

saying, "Let's just dump a bunch of laptops off

onto a population and see what happens."

But that doesn't work. And we've watch

students ripped out the batteries and used them for

everything else under the sun.

So, how does that fit as part of a

broader system? Maybe I am just challenging the

question, but I don't think we can just think about

the technology. So, we have to think about it in a

broader system.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I can certainly

second that. I think it is very, very important in

the question of what technology is doing, if

something new, and maybe to just follow on what

Dana is saying. It's not about the technology but

the whole learning environment that you create with

the tool -- and she mentioned, for example,

Wikipedia or let's say, a media Wiki software.

You can really use it very creatively.

For the first time, we can put all of us on a Wiki

with profile pages, we can work on different

projects.

The learning environment becomes

transparent, and teachers are extremely important.

It can be a teacher that is physically with us in

the room, or it can be people who are coming from

outside of the room because of the network.

So, it is the network environment that

is transparent with tools that allow you to build

and construct digital media, to learn through

design, to learn by teaching; you teach and you

learn in the same environment and there is the

expert guidance.

So, to take this revolutionary idea

that Fred proposed before about home-schooling is,

I think, with the technology of this kind with the

right infrastructure, professional development, not

just physically but also virtually, can allow us to

do home-schooling-like environments for the

homeless, for those who don't have the opportunity,

for those who don't have their parents at home to

run the home-schooling.

And I think that is a huge, new

opportunity that can scale, that's not the

technology alone, it is the give and take with

people from both your physical community, state,

nation and world that come in a way that organizes

itself.

But the Wikipedians have a culture and

rule of how you go about doing this. And how to

learn to become a Wikipedian is the skill that that

structure can do. So, everybody can theoretically

be home-schooled, but not necessarily in their

home. And I think that's the revolution.

MR. L. JOHNSON: More broadly, there is

a set of metaskills that we want learners to learn.

They need to learn how to reflect on their own

knowledge or lack of it and to reflect on their own

learning. And that is actually something which is

not explicit anywhere into the curriculum or often

in the classroom, but is an essential outlearning

outcome, if you will.

Some of that can be derived, you know,

teachers can promote that, technology can promote

that as well. But without that, then any

technology you throw out is going to fail. With

that, lots of technologies can be effective.

MR. WILEY: Another thing that

technology can allow us to do much more

efficiently -- so much more efficiently than maybe

we could really do before, is to effectively

gather, visualize, and then make direct use of a

lot of data that was happening in the classroom.

Because as a teacher, the thing you

really want to know is who knows what, who is

struggling with what, who needs my help, whose way

do I need to get out of. And when you are standing

in front of a group of people like this, you don't

have direct access to that.

But in an online learning environment

where you can see how long people are spending

where, you can see how far behind you are, if

they're read it, did they fail the last thing, did

they do this, did they do that -- you can have them

all, a teacher can see on a dashboard, let's go to

that school and see who is behind, who is failing,

who needs help -- and can just get on the phone and

spend some one-on-one time with the people that

need one-on-one time, to spend time with them and,

that people who in this particular course, this

weak on this unit are doing kinds of --

Bring that data together and making it

usable by us to make good effective use of our

time; because you can't take teachers completely

out of the loop.

MR. GRODD: This is in video games from

Asteroids Pacman on. It's a game where the game is

acutely aware of your ability to play at every

point.

MR. JOHNSON: And so, you stayed in what

was called that zone of competence, right, where

you were like challenging -- not challenging. Then

it was like, gosh, I am going to figure this out,

but I will figure it out and I am going to get to

that.

MR. KALIN: People learn in different

ways. You don't want to test what we should be

learning in the first place.

MR. S. JOHNSON: The wonderful thing

about games is, now like Asteroids and Pacman,

there is one objective. The games are incredibly

rich now, it is like rich in relation or like how

can you create all sorts of objectives that are not

necessarily as score based as --

(Laughter.)

So, it isn't about metrics, it isn't

about points. Most people, I think, don't play

games for points. They play games in a much more

Etsy type feeling way, which is like, I want to

build this little thing or I have got this little,

you know, group, that we are going to go out and we

set goals for ourselves.

But, we're not necessarily trying to

win anymore. We are trying to do these things

along the way, but there's feedback constantly from

the environment saying, get better. You still need

to work on these skills but you have improved

yourself and it is very individualized for each

individual person playing.

MS. RHOTEN: I just want to add to that.

I think that you are right. I would like to extend

what you are saying further. I think about the

power, the back end of it, ways to understand how

the users or the game or the turns they take and

those things and the decisions they make. And then

there is a game development company called...

thinking hard about this and the back end of the

gaming platform.

And I think what we don't really know

is, we know in terms of gaming data leveling, we

know all the different things that are the obvious

explicit way in which a kid goes through games or

games.

What we haven't figured out yet and we

will soon, I think that you're right, and in turn,

and then what that tells us about cognitive inroads

and the cognitive aspects, which really will

empower the arguments that you are making. And we

are on the verge of that, but we haven't gotten it

yet.

MR. GORDON: I want follow on through

quickly. It assumes that as many girls as boys

would play it, probably more. Only a quarter of

the people who play it play it primarily as a game.

And the people who play it as a game tend to stop

playing after 20 hours.

And the people who play it for

four years, play it as a story-telling and creative

device. A quarter of the people play it primarily

as a creative tool and don't play the game at all.

MR. WILSON: It gives us access to

teaching moments. I found myself teaching my

daughter vector calculus, because her school can't

teach her vector calculus. Her vector calculus

teacher sucks.

So, I don't remember this stuff very

well. She came home with a problem which was the

cooling tower, and she had to calculate the volume

of the cooling tower based on the equation of the

curve. I said, God, I can't figure this out.

So, the first thing we did was go to

Google and we found the cooling tower and then,

okay, now we know what a cooling tower looks like.

Then we googled "cooling tower calculus problem,"

then all of a sudden, we found a problem that's

pretty similar to her problem.

We reverse engineered it, the two of us

did it, and she ended up solving the problem. And

it was a great learning moment. And we used the

Web to do that. We used freely available data on

the Web, images and equations and other solutions,

and it required some work on both of our parts to

figure it out. But there's just so much data out

there, and if you just get access to it, at the

right place at the right time, the teaching moments

reveal themselves.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But you did it with

her. That can be part of the occurrence of

technology --

MS. RHOTEN: Talking about learning

through technology. It is the practice, a large

part. It's not just the information push. It is

the practices around, what you do by navigating, by

negotiating, interpreting, evaluating and playing

with that information. And that's where it plays

an important role for whether it's the mentor or

the teacher or the staff or whatever term you use

when --

MR. WENGER: I think technology helps in

that portion, too, where you can discovery your

mentor in --

MS. BOYD: Remember that we have a

complete fear in the society of young people acting

as adults at every level. So, that's not easy,

unless you solved the predator panicked [sic],

could you please do? I beg you.

(Laughter.)

Session 3: New and Old

************************************

*** Hacking Education Transcript ***

*** Part: 3 of 4 ***

************************************

(Video presentation.)

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: So, now you can go

-- scroll down and you will find also different

features really from middle school or high school,

vocational school, community college.

And I think we talked a lot about these

ideas today, finding things that you need on Google

or in your community, and finding -- gain experts

or content experts or programming experts, design

experts on this network that we are putting and

that are starting to take each other, all for free

and available through the governor that is

financing it.

MR. WILSON: I'm just going to ask you,

how do the teachers and the schools and the

students find this tool? Word of mouth? How do

they find out about it?

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: Just word of mouth.

We started in five schools, we grew to eight, and

now we have a huge list of people who are just

registering, "We want to do this, we want to do

this."

We are proving that there is demand,

and therefore, we can probably plug it into the

Department of Education and they are using it to

transform the schools. So, we are now in 14

schools, and some schools are already teaching

these classes.

If we had time, I would have shown you

the curriculum and the Wikis and how it's

customized. So, we have teachers teaching science,

teachers teaching health, teachers teaching

drafting and architecture using this game, and all

different kinds of -- right now, it's based on our

budget.

But it really should be a work and play

type of environment of give and take, which is

really what the plans of it is now, but we just

wanted them to demonstrate the scalability and

demand.

MR. WILSON: Thank you.

MR. GRODD: About nine months ago, I

started Better Lesson, which is, hopefully, on the

way of becoming the social network for teachers.

It started in the United States and is aspiring to

be the social network for teachers internationally.

It is focused around sort of -- this first version

is focused around PowerPoint for teachers which is,

what do I teach tomorrow, how do I create it and

where do I find that.

So, I spent so much time over the past

four years reinventing the wheel, writing lessons

from scratch and then when I had done that, it

would waste away on my desktop. There's no way for

me to share my creations with other teachers.

And I think it is just so detrimental

to my instructions. I spent four hours. I would

spend on average three to four hours each night

writing lessons. My only option is to go with the

scripted textbook or reinvent the wheel. Those are

really the core options for most teachers today.

We have built and launched three months

ago the alpha, beta version of a social networking

site, with the sort of highest level of file

sharing technology. Some of it are files that are

from script and embedded with Facebook and are

rolling it out through high performing charter

schools, in pre-schools.

And now it's sort of, the main

difference between us and all of the other

initiatives that we're trying to do is, because

when I first came up with the idea about three

years ago, I thought it was totally not like the

others. It's like this is totally original and

teachers sharing files in the internet.

(Laughter.)

And over the past year, there's been

dozens of well-funded initiatives. One called...

Teachers just folded up two months ago after trying

for two years correcting these, and either Sun

MicroSystems people and sort of flailing out there,

trying to figure out who they are, what to do.

And so, my very brief take on the space

currently is that there's been two types of

attempts to correct this. Now, on one hand, we

have the open source movement represented by Wiki

of CC Learn; and on the other hand, we have

intranet, which are closed off internet.

And the open source -- the failure of

the open source initiative, it indicates -- in the

K-12 space well, it's not referring to open course

software.

In the K-12 space, there's been to go

from the isolated teacher, which is the status quo,

to the global revolution overnight. And so, that,

the open source movement failed to account for the

fact that teaching is best when it's done locally,

we have local standards, we have local protocols,

local rubrics.

And it's sharing better when you know

who you are sharing it with. And they failed to do

that literally. There's a global revolution

online. But I don't want a global revolution. I

want to share with the person down the hall.

And the closed internet is the failure

that every -- and this is -- it's tragic that every

major district, every state and every major charter

management organization has an intranet and it's

all defunct, literally, ineffective.

You've got millions and millions of

dollars invested in these intranets. And the

reason they're defunct is you can't initiate the

wisdom of the crowds without a crowd.

And so, you're talking to CMOs that

have 1,200 teachers. And you can't really create

sorts of the depth and breadth of content you need

to have it into the lessons, which is the substance

of what we aspire to be, when you're dealing with

1200 teachers.

So, our response, aside from creating a

totally unique interface and technology, is to

channel Chris over there, and do a Facebook that

did very well, roll out the real world community,

keeping it local and starting with one charter

management organization in May, and to roll out to

another and then maintain the integrity of local

sharing of files, while beginning to incrementally

graduate an approach to that open source vision and

have the sharing crossover to communities.

I think the Facebook analog is a very

good one for us and it's really been highly

influential, so, thank you, Chris.

MR. WILSON: The essential element today

is a class, one class worth of several things.

MR. GRODD: What about 180 days to the

core for most K-12 teachers is 180 days of

instruction. What we allow you to do is see... If

you are learning yourself as you finance out from

high performing teacher to one lesson, one

50-minute lesson out of those 180 days, as we have

introduced today, that teachers that is using

multiple -- also to be using video games, they're

PBS PowerPoint and YouTube courses.

One 50-minute lesson, we allow you to

aggregate that content on a one-page, sequence in

an order, then you drag and drop one unit, and then

sequence those units into the 180 days. And that's

the way teachers teach now. So, our organizational

hierarchy is really resources, which are primarily

files, that is now, to a lesson to a unit to a

course.

And we allow you to do that really in a

nice, intuitive way. And so, as opposed to going

to -- not to pick on these open sources, but if you

go to open sources and you find the resource.

That resource helps you for the

one-third of one class under the 180 days. When

you come in with a better lesson and you find the

highest performance sixth-grade social studies

teachers in the country, then you have their 180

days mapped out for you.

And you can -- instead of having all

your time reinventing, trying to recreate those 180

days, you can take that foundational knowledge now

to tailor that instruction to the needs of your

students.

MR. WILSON: But the thing that's

interesting for me is that you've got a whole

semester's worth of the teaching, but each lesson

is its own unit. And then each lesson, there's

units within that.

And don't you really want to facilitate

sharing the most atomic elements and not the whole

thing?

MR. GRODD: We do. I think the goal is

to be able to have people mix and match in those --

every -- not just atomic, everything. Mix and

match and have two of your lessons in my unit, two

of your lessons in one unit, two of your files in

one of my lessons.

And so, that's the goal and that's what

we facilitate here. It's like favor, favor of

something to understand. It's very specific to do

in a lesson and also in a unit.

MS. BOYD: How does the network work?

MR. GRODD: The social network is a

Facebook right now.

And so, it's similar to Facebook. When

you find someone that you're really interested in

sharing your community with them, and our site

you'll become a colleague with someone, they can

then use your curriculum and they -- they can do

their own.

So, it's really meaningful, so --

MS. BOYD: But then you have to be

willing to colleague everybody for them to share?

It could be yourself?

MR. GRODD: No. There's two for this.

Great question.

Each individual artifact, when you

upload a file, you can set sharing permissions.

So, this is another core to friendships. So, you

can -- it would open to all of the other lessons.

And you can share just to your colleagues or keep

it private because you have many organizational

tools. Some people just use them and not to share

it, to organize their stuff online.

And then -- so, that's for each

individual object. But in order to share your full

recipe book, your full 180 days, you've got to be

on top of it. Some people really like that because

it gives people a sense of ownership of their

curriculum. It forces them to just always meet new

people in order to share.

MS. BOYD: So, is it required to confirm

that we are colleagues? Basically, there are

politics with these things. It's like, I think we

are colleagues, but you don't think the same.

(Laughter.)

MR. GRODD: Yeah, that's an issue. It

hadn't been an issue thus far because we rolled it

out to 300 other teachers. And I anticipate that

being an issue. And so, I think, in any sort of

project in the social network, and slightly, they

just quote from a UI standpoint, the technical

standpoint, is issue permissioning and trying to

replicate real roles in that network.

MS. BOYD: This made me wonder early

about this. So, they're going to be much more

friendly in this? And there is more of a direct to

draft element, when you have to deal with one

network.

If only we'd be talking about social

situations for whatever these professional networks

come into play, you actually have so many levels of

politics for this.

MR. GRODD: I agree.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I think it's a

fantastic idea and we were wondering if educator's

Wiki, that it could probably benefit by sending

educators to what you're facilitating.

What I can see coming is a need

for -- first of all, there is no high bandwidth in

a lot of the schools. And a lot of these educators

that you're trying to reach may not have both the

access or the knowledge of how to upload and

download and remake and whatever. And I wonder if

you have virtual Web based training sections?

MR. GRODD: Yes. But that's what we're

doing. We're kind of rolling out the individual

schools, literally; one school at a time.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: Yes.

MR. GRODD: We're working with those

schools, mostly in Boston and New York, primarily

charter schools going in there, training teachers,

working with instructional coaches.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But that means to

also become virtual, what you just said.

MR. GRODD: Yes, sure. One step at a

time.

MR. L. JOHNSON: Are you inviting course

work publishers to participate in this network?

MR. GRODD: Yes. We invite those. We

just want good quality content to work in this open

source curriculum, organizations working with Larry

Berger and of , which is something

you might have heard of more...

So, we are totally open. And I mean,

it's kind of a -- Fred, you were saying that you

were trying to find the deep set of it. Teachers

are so much tougher on the internet.

And it just -- but to go through Google

for a teacher, then you need to figure out the day

of the platform and try to figure out what you're

teaching tomorrow, spend three hours googling to

get to the good stuff, which is really, really

hard.

And for everybody, we're thanking you

for the questions.

The stuff is there. But we're trying

to aggregate and doing it in a way -- we're trying

to organize it, make it searchable and play the

matchmaker to -- when you register with us, you

know what grade level you teach, what subject you

teach and try to sort of matchmake you and give you

the best stuff that we can give you.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But also, you are

giving -- other teachers can help you form this,

the new way of teaching and learning. And I think

that may be even more important. Having a team of

teachers who are doing the same thing in different

classrooms together.

MR. GRODD: Yes. I was shocked. When I

was teaching sixth-grade social studies, and I

said, Well, I don't really know what I'm doing with

that, so I'm trying to find another middle school

social studies teacher in Georgia that knows what

they're doing. It just doesn't exist.

Like, literally, you have to guess,

scour blogs. It just doesn't exist. So, the

ability to find other people teaching what you are

teaching, being able to have some sort of dialogue.

There's a massive need for it.

MR. O'DONNELL: What do you think is the

most effective motivation for getting the

individual teacher to share? Is it the access to

-- if I share this, then I can get somebody else's

thing? Is it the reputation of, I want to be the

teacher who gets the community credit of forming

the best lesson? Or is there a potential -- and I

don't know if you are doing this -- so that I could

literally sell a lesson perhaps to -- if I have the

best lesson on the causes of World War II?

Other people might want to buy that at

two bucks a pop or something.

MR. GRODD: I will say three things.

One is the direct correlation between age and

comfortableness. So, first off, the sort younger

generation teachers, the 25 to 35, it's generally

much more comfortable with sharing things in

general, we don't have much of the concerns that

you might think teachers would have.

The second thing is that the best

teachers are lesson artists. They can create --

someone talked about this earlier -- they can

create amazing works of art. You can spend

five hours, which I have, on a mind history

PowerPoint Jeopardy game. That's -- you create

whatever -- you want to share it. It's helping --

you're helping a hundred students, right now, a

year with that kind of history PowerPoint. You

show the 600 teachers you're helping the 600

students.

So, this is a strong desire, and then

that ties into things that -- that how many Twitter

followers, are fundamentally wanting to be

recognized. So, we are just using the Web tool for

metrics. Each file would be tracking the number of

views, the number of downloads, the number of

shares. It's amazing how a teacher is all ready to

give to 300 teachers, and those teachers come back

everyday to see how many people viewed the web and

taught in it.

So, it is a fundamentally, teachers

want to share and, like any artist, want to share

and they want to be recognized. So, we're trying

to use the Web to recognize. And if they were

teachers, our Web will target rock stars.

MR. ETUK: How difficult is it to

overcome that full questionnaire? How do I use

this level?

MR. GRODD: What we have done is, we've

tried to take almost no point of view, we tried to

be an agnostic platform instead of a sharing

platforms with point of views that we have taken

than organizational hierarchy. So, people, when

they're uploading or creating the lessons on our

site, they create a lesson that has objective, it

has a plan and it has resources.

So, people generally -- they view and

browse throughout the site. It is pretty much the

way most teachers are delivering instructions and

probably presentations; am I right?

MR. WILSON: About a week ago, I gave a

talk to a bunch of television executives and I

published 22 slides on the Web, on Slide Share.

And I got a couple of messages from people who had

downloaded my talk and had delivered the talk.

But there's no audio. So, they took my

22 slides and they delivered the same talk. The

slides had no words on them; right?

So, they literally had to be -- spread

on it one word at the top and then a picture. So,

there was no -- and they just delivered it.

And I think there is something really

interesting about the idea that you can take, in

effect, a framework for a lesson or a presentation

and different people will have a different slant on

it, but the framework is pretty consistent piece of

organization.

MR. GRODD: Again, we did a lot of user

testing and a lot of focus groups on how teachers

generally organize their content to lessons.

Lessons are generally organized into units. That's

it. Lessons are made up of multiple resources,

diverse multiple media.

MR. BURNHAM: I think that's a wake-up

call here. And I think Paul and Dave are both

constructing sites where teachers can reach

audiences in probably different ways and ultimately

perhaps make a living in a different way. In some

ways,if somebody's motivated by some of the same

objectives, they would also be motivated by the

possibility of making a living.

MR. MILLER: I run the School of

Everything, which is a very simple way of matching

up people who have something to teach and focus

primarily on their local area. It's about trying

to find somebody to teach you something

face-to-face in your local area.

And then, the thing that we found very,

very quickly is that there are already lots and

lots of people doing this. So, there's a kind of

market of self-employed freelance teachers that are

teaching music lessons or language lessons or

whatever it might be. And so, those are the people

who are using the School of Everything at the

moment.

And it is really interesting that,

basically, it's a growing group, made up of an

economically driven -- I don't know. There's so

many people that are turning their passions,

supporting their passions by teaching them. And

so, they may have a day job, but they are finding a

way to make that leap out of a job that they don't

like into maybe they're teaching something that

they do like as a way of supporting -- doing what

they like.

And that's something that's seeing an

increase. And so, we get so many stories of people

doing that. That's really wonderful to see that

happen.

MR. BURNHAM: Is what you have just a

marketplace? There's no curriculum or notion of

curriculum? It's just a matching function?

MR. MILLER: Yes. It's just a matching

function. What you find is, people already sign up

to some particular curriculum. It's like, for

example, I didn't know about painting, but there's

a technique for learning oil painting is called

the... oil painting technique.

It's really -- this learning lesson

will teach using the particular method of teaching

oil painting. And so, now we have pretty much

every... oil painting technique teacher in the UK

on the site.

MR. JARVIS: Off of PBS 15 years ago.

Like all good educators, you make it

look easy.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: What I see is that

you have a very nice transparent system of looking

at how many people are teaching and how many are

learning. But it looks like it's the same teacher

teaching two groups. Can you explain how that

works?

MR. MILLER: How do you mean?

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: It says, like

teaching to learning. What does that mean?

MR. MILLER: So, we ask people what they

want to learn as they sign up, as well. So, we're

going to have demand and supply for every local

area. We are not big enough to be able to be kind

of, properly demonstrating exactly what a

particular town wants to learn.

We have supply and demand in place.

And an interesting one that we have noticed is that

we have far more people who are wanting to learn

photography than there are teachers. And I say

that's kind of function of -- digital photography

has, kind of, exploded and the number of people who

can teach it hasn't caught up yet.

MR. JARVIS: So, what do you do about

that? How do you create --

MR. MILLER: We try to find people to

teach digital photography.

MR. JARVIS: So, what are the best tools

to find them? Craig's List, or what?

MR. MILLER: We don't have Craig's List

in the UK. Photography shops, we have notice

boards --

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: And is it only

one-to-one, or one-to-many?

MR. MILLER: Most of the teaching is

one-to-one, but there are quite a lot of classes,

as well. It depends on the subject. The music

classes are almost always one-to-one. Some things,

like art classes, tend to be a group.

MR. BURNHAM: And is there a reputation

system?

MR. MILLER: Yes. Basically,

endorsements. One thing we found is that teachers

were very wary of five-star systems around

teaching, because they think it is a bad

relationship with a student and that that's

basically subjective. So, teachers are suspicious,

we found, when we talked to them of objective

representation systems when it comes to teaching.

MR. WILSON: You can only give an

endorsement?

MR. JARVIS: Not an "undorsement."

MR. MILLER: At the moment, we placed

that at the top. We actually haven't had any

complaints about the teachers at all.

MR. L. JOHNSON: There are existing

platforms for social networking, such as Facebook.

They're existing platforms for management such as

Noodle [sic], and why are you going your own way in

this regard?

MR. GRODD: I get that question every

day. So, I think, for me, it is fundamentally --

to do this well, we will have to create a sense of

real privacy for of teachers.

If they're exchanging their tests and

quizzes and exchanging their instructional content,

for the first version, we want to ensure that we do

our best to make them feel that sense of privacy.

You really can't do it now on Facebook.

And the other thing is, teachers go to

Facebook to get away from their professional life.

It is an escape in many ways. So, we prefer to let

it be that escape, have our site be focused around

professionals.

MR. BISCHKE: I think it's similar to

Etsy and eBay. You know what I mean? You look at

Etsy and you look at eBay and some way it's similar

functions. But in other ways, they are very

different.

And I think that some of the stuff that

has been talked about here, the notion of education

is just so fundamentally different from a lot of

other things that are happening on the Web, that

you really need to tap into that to leverage that.

I think that the best platforms are

built by people who have actually taught, who

understand how difficult it is to be a teacher,

what some of the challenges are, and can build

systems from the ground up to address those

challenges.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But in our case, we

really couldn't use any of the existing systems

that had advertising on it, because when we did

some tests with the -- especially the economically

underprivileged and technologically underserved

populations -- especially in public schools, they

don't see the ad.

So, we have to create something that is

open source, clean, noncommercial for them to adopt

it. This is why we created our own platform, not

because it didn't exist in other forms. And a

commercial version of this probably will be

different.

MR. BURNHAM: And how is what you are

doing different than what Paul is doing?

MR. SCHAPPELL: I think it's exactly the

same. Our mission is to crush Paul.

(Laughter.)

I would say we're about as perfectly

aligned on a mission as two organizations can be.

And there probably aren't any other -- it is a very

weird space that we are in, that this is fairly

absent. And what the TeachStreet team brings to

the game, we are basically an ex-Amazon group, with

some other folks thrown in, with experience

building marketplaces.

So, we look at what Rob -- and I'll use

Scott as an example. The idea that somebody could

launch a company like... to bring together

disparate groups of people to learn things is

really what, in my opinion -- what goes on with...

And so, when I went to learn about

podcasting, I started this podcasting and Second

Life meetups in Seattle. And within days, upon

hours of podcasting, the first group was set up and

meeting. And my wife thinks that's mildly odd,

like people get together at a bar to talk about

Second Life. And they were odd.

(Laughter.)

What we are trying to build we think is

a massive marketplace around things that people are

passionate about. And so, a lot of what was being

discussed today, I hope you all figured it out, and

it's sort of like the learning up to age 22, 23,

when you get the confidence to go and learn

whatever it is that you are excited about.

Some people can start when you're 10,

and some people it never starts. But the idea for

TeachStreet came from really, I'm a class taker,

and it really hasn't improved that much with all

that the Web's done. You go and search online and

the people that win those searches are online video

bloggers. They're not the person that lives within

a mile of you who's a great piano teachers.

And so, we're trying to get them a

platform where they can list themselves as a

teacher or as an expert. They can be reviewed and

negatively reviewed by the people that take the

classes. It doesn't happen often, very much like

Amazon. You don't get any negative reviews. And

then you can pay to take them off of our sites.

(Laughter.)

I'm kidding.

(Laughter.)

It is really is about learning --

that's the difference, the accreditation issue

isn't something we're trying to tackle. We don't

really go after the college education or even the

grades K to 12.

We're really about creating platforms

so that if you're an expert in something -- I need

another example. I listed a class in Twitter, and

within 24 hours I had three people contact me for

this class that I put up as a joke a little bit, I

wanted to teach people to teach people who wanted

to learn Twitter.

Three people, totally randomly, had

contacted me about it and I had to let it expire.

So, I don't want to keep teaching this class. But

you could make money teaching a class about how to

teach Twitter, because it is a common search term.

MR. JARVIS: Finally, a business model.

(Laughter.)

MR. WILSON: This is largely for the

adult community. It is not like -- my kids have

piano teachers and drum teachers and computer guys

come over to teach my son how to write computer

software.

MR. SCHAPPELL: For all that, too.

Anything you want to learn, experts set themselves

up online. They indicate that they teach children

to adults.

MR. WILSON: You said something about K

through 12, you go figure that out. I think this

might be more -- what's like going to come -- we're

going to start realizing that we and our kids are

just realizing that if they're not going to get it

in school, they'll have to get it somewhere.

MR. SCHAPPELL: I think that you can

supplement a lot of the learning places, the

piecing together, what's the thing you're excited

about this week? And that sort of stuff drives my

wife nuts. I go through a month where I want to

learn about photography, and I'll go through a

month where I might learn to cook and never cook,

and you just sort of piece these things together,

whether TeachStreet or MeetUp. It's all the tools

that are out there and how you patch them together.

MR. JARVIS: This is how to do vouchers.

If you gave people vouchers for that. That's

vouchers that are working.

THE SPEAKER: Paul, Can you tell the

story of how you came to this idea and the

historical perspective on this?

MR. MILLER: In 1965 a group of students

at Stanford wanted to learn computer science. The

curriculum hadn't caught up. So, they set up their

own university, a message board, which is a piece

of paper and you write at the top of that the sheet

what you can teach and people would sign up. It

had two courses for the first week and they agreed

to have 300 courses every week. At it's a big book

that was going around.

John reckons that at its peak, it had

50,000 students. It changed the way that Stanford

was organized, as far as the way that John

explained it.

And to wrap it up, if you're going to

do that today, you wouldn't use a pinboard and some

pieces of paper; you'd use the inter-Webs.

MR. BISCHKE: One question for Dave and

Paul. It seems right now with the economy, there's

this massive structural shift. If Detroit goes

under -- you have all these people now we need to

get them trained.

So, my question to you guys is, how

much of what you guys are seeing right now in

schools and TeachStreet is what you guys call

continuing professional education versus hobbies,

crafts, entertainment, passions --

MR. SCHAPPELL: We're a lot more toward

the latter, probably; just being real honest. When

we launched we didn't know. So, we threw

everything up and probably the five of the

eight main categories where there's just a lot more

energy is around creative, language, sports. I

don't think it will stay there.

How to build a non fuel-efficient car

hadn't showed up yet. It's a lot more on the

aspirational learning, which is great, because it

really has a lot of tools. We just launched

two weeks ago. It's a little laughable -- much

blogging, potential articles. Teachers can write

articles.

It's amazing, people just writing about

everything and uploading videos. It's not

surprising. But compared to the classes and their

reputations and reviews, it is exactly what we

thought would happen, and it is happening.

MR. MILLER: And it's pretty similar to

us. Our three main categories are crafts, music,

languages and arts. But what surprises us is, kind

of sustainable environmental stuff. That really

seems to be that passionate people -- the teaching

people about environment and the sustainability

that we haven't expected.

MR. WENGER: What about E-fire?

MR. MILLER: Language and test prep are

our two biggest categories. But it's interesting

because we have seen, like what was mentioned,

sustainability. There's a guy who teaches a class

called the Green House, and it's one of our most

popular classes.

We've also had a class on how to use

Twitter, which ended up on the top 10 searches on

Twitter for a while, because everyone in the class

was tweeting at the same time.

So, it's been an interesting kind of

hybrid of pushing certain areas that we know have

well-defined markers, like, language and test prep;

and then also having an open platforms where we can

say, you know what, teach whatever you want to

teach. Anybody can start a class in whatever

they're passionate about. It's similar to what

Dave and Paul are doing. That's a real option that

we are seeing.

THE SPEAKER: A 21st century Madoff

scheme, we may have seen behavior like twittering

and then have a whole industry of teaching how to

behave --

(Laughter.)

MR. WENGER: Schools are teaching a lot

of things that are very obscure and not politically

useful.

MR. KALIN: A college degree -- you just

gave us all this money to get a degree and it just

qualifies us to give more money to the school;

because we go back to school and they keep you in

grad school.

MR. WILSON: I want to ask Terry a

question.

Do you think that some of these

marketplace models like the School of Everything

and TeachStreet will be useful in the

home-schooling movement? Can you imagine using

these services to identify specific teachers that

you can use?

MS. FLEMAL: I absolutely can, because

right now we often use Craig's List, honestly. For

us, it's economical. And oftentimes, if we are

looking for a Spanish teacher -- we've gone to

Craig's List to find someone good at philosophy --

like somebody would come in and talk with the child

about philosophy --

MR. BURNHAM: You found somebody

advertising this?

MS. FLEMAL: Yes, absolutely. For

philosophy, we just happened to find somebody who

knew, who had a doctorate in philosophy and didn't

have a job. And the guy was just incredible. And

it happened that he was perfect for what we were

looking for.

Yes, there is an absolute need for

that. And so, yes, I think definitely, and I'm

thinking and hearing that it is something that's a

perfect match, absolutely.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I think that a lot

of the home-schooling, we're getting a lot of

e-mails and people using us although we're not

really marketing or trying to reach this

population, and because it's open source, they can

just come and they are telling us how they are

using it so down the road we will launch it for

them.

But to relate to the other question of

what takes off in a network, we realize there is a

small network of innovators and it relates to some

of what I have said. They really need to figure

out how to create these innovative things that they

are willing to jump in and trying to take a risk

and connect it to what they call the content

standards that -- the things that are out there.

And once you give them a lot of support

with all these innovative platforms and a very

comprehensive curriculum that we have on

step-by-step, how to use it, and you match it with

where they are, they really adopt it.

And they are willing to come to, with

exceptions and virtual tutorials on how -- so for

those of you who are innovating and trying to

create communities, I think the more you create

tutorials for them so they have the answer for

their system, the more loyal they will become.

That's my experience.

MS. FLEMAL: I love the idea of

connecting teachers, because so many teachers are

isolated in their classrooms, whether they are, for

us our home-schooling teachers, who are very

isolated in different homes. But also the teachers

in the classrooms often are in that room all day

and the only place they see other teachers is in

the faculty room and some teachers don't even go to

faculty rooms.

So, they would be open to that life

sharing; there's got a lot of release time to

teachers to be able to share. So, the opportunity

to do that in a platform such as that would be a

wonderful thing. You really have the

opportunity --

I think from the outside, there is this

imagination that teachers share a lot more than

they do. So the opportunity to do that tenfold

magnifies the learning that teachers can continue

to do that as they continue their career.

MR. WILEY: I want to say a thing or two

about the Open High School in Utah. And we talked

a little bit this morning about ways we're using

technology. Open High School of Utah is an open

charter school. And in our charter, we committed

ourselves to exclusively using open educational

resources.

So, in terms of teachers sharing items

as opposed to sharing lesson plans and resources,

we've done a complete textbook replacement, all the

material on everything you need to run the course

is what we're providing with open source for

everyone.

So, working in a manner that's not

dissimilar from the University of the People, we're

going around and finding material, aggregating,

state standards, building standards identifying,

matching, building content, putting that together.

And also, I have a mission, not to

scale our individual school out to the world; but

when there's a completely open curriculum available

and a charter application documents and budgets and

things are available, other people just pick up and

start these schools. We don't have to be involved

and the curriculum is free, things like that.

In addition to the personalization and

the individualization I was talking about earlier

today, the point of open source.

MR. BURNHAM: Dave brings us back to

what the theme was for the last hour, which we

didn't really touch on, which is the relationship

between everything that we have talked about and

where we are today.

And by putting the template out there,

it is going to create a vehicle that will allow us

to begin to influence the current educational

system. There will be leakage that we talked about

and people educating themselves, many of the tools

we have talked about.

I would like to put Chris on the spot

here for a second. If there is another vehicle

that we might be able to use. Chris is the

architect of Obama's "My Obama" website, and that

was a very effective political advocacy vehicle.

And the question is, If you think about

the Web as a platform, is there any way of creating

a credible and effective political advocacy towards

trying to address the failures of the current

educational system?

MR. HUGHES: I think it's interesting,

listening to the conversation, particularly the

second-half of it. I think essentially what we're

talking about here, this service market online

which happens to be in context of education,

because that's what a lot of people here specialize

in. And there are good examples of people starting

to solve the problem.

So, that is one piece of a much broader

market of different people who have different

services and you can frame that as education or any

other services that someone is trying to provide.

So, I feel like that's the direction

things are going in. But if that doesn't

deconverge, then I think that, the question you are

asking about political organizing, or whether or

not that has an implications for it -- I think it

does, but it requires a sort of a historical,

cultural moment when people realize when things are

broken.

And that's a question that I don't know

when it comes to education. It seems to me pretty

clear that the way that kids are still being taught

these days, and the fact that there's a computer

that's over there in the corner of the classroom,

but that's only the extent to which technology may

play a role, it sort of seems like it is broken to

me.

And I feel like, as more and more

people understand that something isn't right, that

we are using technology all throughout the day but

our students aren't using it on a hands on way in

the classroom; then it opens up a real opportunity

for starting integrating office tools that people

are starting to develop now, actually in the

classroom, in students' hands.

MR. WENGER: Could you build a novel

item community of events as part of the question

that brings this dialogue, takes this kind of

dialogue and makes it -- a more actual change

function?

MR. BURNHAM: The school board is the

issue right here, that's the mechanism. And the

politics of the school board, and you were very

clever in figuring out how to create advocacy for

national politics -- but is there some way that

these issues to the degree that parents have more

direct access to a conversation about the issues

and that could be used to create leverage, to

create change?

MR. HUGHES: Yes. I think we can create

that infrastructure and people would use it. I

don't think it's enough. Until there's a cultural

movement, until it's understood in a broader

content that our schools aren't working.

I think that people are disappointed,

but I think it's very different when -- I think

that's really required for any type of real

organizing infrastructure to matter. But as far as

whether or not you could create it, unless people

care about it, I'm not sure of that.

MR. JARVIS: Will it ever come? Fred

was proposing the revolution of the importance of

home-schooling. You're saying, and I think it's

right, unless there's enough of a movement, the

rest doesn't matter.

Are we ever going to get there or?

MR. CAULFIELD: I think ultimately, the

first drop to fall is going to be cost -- if you

look even at open access political movements where

some inroads are being made as, Hey, we paid for

this research, open up this research.

And I think that's -- if you're looking

for -- like this is a niche crowd. We want to

change education in terms of what it does. But I

think the broader movement that we're going to see

is -- people talk about the tuition bubble, and

we're really up against the upper bound of being

able to do this at all at the price that we're

hitting.

I think as that bubble bursts, the

important thing is there are numerous ways to

address the expense of education and some of them

are detrimental to how education is done. And some

of them create opportunities for a better

education. I think the real challenge is going to

be -- as we start to bump up against that cost,

especially in hard economic times, how do we steer

that?

And there's some models around the

world in terms of government involvement with open

resources, sharing, things like that, that we could

emulate. But there are also the ways of political

camp, just slash it, just remove, keep the system

the same, just remove a bunch of pieces.

MS. BOYD: One of the things -- I was

reading about the history of education in the U.S.,

And It's funny how downturns in the economy always

involve upturns in what happen in schools, and we

get more motivated and more directed about it. And

we're seeing it in terms of energy about people

thinking of teaching as a stable, reasonable job

and all sorts of things.

MR. JARVIS: Our applications are up

40 percent.

MR. CAULFIELD: For example, in open

courseware, one of the opportunities here, I think,

is that you have a lot of state universities. You

have a lot of people in state universities on

taxpayer dollars who are creating curriculum. And

so, there is a question there, if we are paying the

bills that -- those curricula, and we could more

broadly disseminate it and educate more people for

less, then --

MS. BOYD: Can we actually explicitly

target the places where things are cracking the

worst? We're seeing these two different ruptures

happening simultaneously. It's super intensive,

it's so local, there are so many different effects.

So, can things specifically go after an ideal test

that...

For example, you're watching

California's state budget not balance. So, is

there a way in which you actually come in and use

as an ideal intervention point around community

colleges, around schools or --

MR. CAULFIELD: I think that's kind of

what David is doing -- it's on a state-by-state

level. Eventually, some state -- because I don't

think it could be on the school board level, I

don't think it's going to happen in K-12 because

it's 9,000 institutions.

So, you can't do it on the K-12 level.

But on the state college level or on the state

charter school level, on the state level things, if

there is a successful model and it's done below

cost, I think that's where it is going to happen.

And if someone proposed something in California

right now, yes, that might be a perfect example.

MR. WILEY: In the State of Utah, I can

tell you, if we got this curriculum rolled out.

And the kids will get it this fall and are going to

make a YP at the end of the year. The next summer,

there's conversations about what to do with the

textbooks we have to replace and with the money

supposed to be spent on curriculum?

And there's a completely open source

curriculum, and we can show kids YP when they use

it. It kind of forces a lot of really interesting

conversations and that is a very strong secondary

goal. Obviously, after the goal of the kids in

school --

MR. WENGER: The curriculum development,

is that open course already as well in -- can

people contribute to that already?

MR. WILEY: The way you can contribute

right now, you help us fill the bag. We're

currently trying to identify all the resources

there and the state standard for writing. And

that's what we are doing right now. People can

contribute to that.

MR. WENGER: That in and of itself is an

open process .

MR. RESNICK: I think it's still be -- a

greater effort to understand the real problems and

challenges of education. We're looking at three

things to talk about, we observe three priorities

of health care, energy and education.

I do think, my sense as a general

consensus of the public, is they recognize that

healthcare as a crisis, energy is in crisis. I

don't think there's as much of an understanding of

what this group has that education needs to be

hacked. Somehow there has to be a better

education, to help us understand the billing

challenges.

MR. WILSON: Maybe not. Because when

the government goes about hacking something, we are

all toast.

(Laughter.)

MR. RESNICK: The government doesn't

have to hack it, but --

MR. WILSON: I think we have to put the

government out of education business. If we could

bankrupt those schools in that system, and create

something that's better, then we can beat it.

That's what happens when hacking --

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I don't agree.

MR. GORDON: We need the eight-year old

vote.

MR. WILEY: Buckminster Fuller says you

can't make the existing reality obsolete. I think

there's something new that makes the existing

reality obsolete.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I really would like

to argue that you can -- also, in fact, the

revolution and state of the revolution from within

that existing system and build models that really

force them to change from within. And, otherwise,

you will not get funded. To fund education,

because you don't fund that.

MR. WILSON: I don't want to fund that.

I want to fund these kinds of people.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: Exactly. But you

don't, not yet.

(Laughter.)

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: So, we will be

delighted to actually form a good strategy to how

things like this can get funded. But right now,

the way the funding goes to solve the crisis,

especially with this population that Dana was

pointing towards, those that are really in a crisis

and also the places where they are in a crisis and

the ability to fund it.

I think you have to reach people in the

school system because -- they don't have Starbucks

in their neighborhood. They have just a school

with high speed Internet and maybe a library with

high speed Internet. Most of them have dial-up, if

at all, at home.

And if we really want to reach them and

get that funded, you have to figure out that open

source participation from outside of the community

to contribute to those disadvantaged communities.

And I think that's a way of thinking about it, that

you cannot really just say "trash government."

Because government right now, they have

a lot of money. They may not tell us what to do,

but if we approach it right, we can take little

pieces of the fact that the $7 billion into wiring

the state. And what will we do with this?

MR. BURNHAM: Both extremes are --

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I'm not extreme.

MR. BURNHAM: You're not extreme.

Fred's taking a extreme position. But I think what

David said, it's a really interesting point and

that is that we can force change by just showing

them the raw economics of alternatives, in a

situation where economics are real and meaningful

and there's not a lot to go around.

And that's probably the moment that

Chris is talking about. It may not be a public

perception moment, but in those individual

decisions, if we can get a great example out there

where you can do this more efficiently.

There's a problem with the notion that

we are going to fund the solution to this problem,

and that is that what was what Bing talked about

earlier which is the zero marginal cost

implementation. If David is right, then what it is

going to do ideally is drive down the cost of

education for everybody in a way that maybe

diminishes the opportunity for investment in that

space. But that's a problem for us.

MR. WILSON: Craig's List is in the

classified business. That's the opportunity for

us.

MR. KALIN: It's a $6 billion year

industry, the textbook industry. If you could get

a fifth of that, you'd be in pretty good shape.

MR. HEIFERMAN: I don't know anything

about education or schools. I recognize seeing

through the years, in the past 15 years, every sort

of big, big industry or big part of the world that

you really couldn't hack it, that -- like, who

would have really thought that YouTube would be

where it is relative to TV networks? Or Craig's

List to newspapers?

I think that the idea of things

bubbling up have -- seems crazy and farfetched

and -- they don't really cease to surprise.

My favorite Barack Obama line is that,

"We are the ones we have been waiting for." And

it's a surprise that that comes out of these

platforms like Dave's and Paul's -- and what I've

experienced at meet-ups is -- never thought that it

was a platform for education, but in fact, what --

that's sort of the base function that is actually

providing with -- all the people are going

to entrepreneur meet-sup, small business meet-up,

whether, you know, language meet-ups and moms'

meet-ups.

They want to learn about

entrepreneurship or -- some of these women say they

learned how to potty-train their kids at the moms'

meet-up.

So, this is not necessarily a

market-based model, like there's a transaction of

I'm going to teach it, I'm going to learn it. That

model is great, but it's just a classic history of

the human idea of it taking a village or just

people learning in the context of the community.

So, it's a long way of trying to say

that, I think, is the decentralized, emergent

systems and behaviors. They can hack at a big

system -- now, maybe that's in 20 years. Does that

fit -- I'm with Fred. I would look at things 10,

20 years from now, and I think there would be some

seismic shifts and we --

MR. SACKLER: I think this is important,

right now, with government-run monopolies, we get

to the very different beast of diving into private

enterprise for socioeconomic --

MR. KALIN: Because you're looking at

education, looking at learning, and the government

can't have a monopoly on learning.

MR. HEIFERMAN: No, they don't. But

they have a monopoly on kids' time and it's a

trillion dollars a year spent across the country.

So, I think there is a role for political action to

organize, none of which was talked about these

sessions, which is very critical if we're really

going to connect.

Because it's $500 billion a year run

through that monopoly which is politically-driven,

not marketplace-driven. And if we're really going

to impact it, we're going to have to act pretty

good at starting to nibble away at that --

MS. RHOTEN: I think it's also a matter

of getting examples out there which are

demonstrative. Right now a lot of what we're

talking about, TeachStreet has come up, and all

these different things come up.

We can't yet demonstrate a lot of the

ideas, which are important. I guess I

fundamentally believe in. But I think part of our

challenge --

MR. GRODD: I would posit that the

biggest problem facing K-12 right now is human

capital. It is talent, and it's not a great thing

to talk about. But having spent a lot of time in

the system and those who have -- there is a big

issue with the fact that the talent pool is not

deep. And I'm not talking about teachers, I'm

talking about principals, administrators, policy

people. People making a decision -- the most

important decisions -- in fact, our students, are

not necessarily people you would hire, and that's

the reality. And until we --

MR. BURNHAM: Is that in part because

it's not an inspiring place to work?

MR. GRODD: It's because the incentives

aren't there. My buddies graduated from good

schools, go to McKenzie, because it's prestige.

Like, who wants to go -- the reason I taught for

Teach For America, because that gave me a

prestigious way to become a teacher, probably I

wouldn't have had it not been for Teach For

America.

So, what Teach For America is doing --

there are few other places. What they're doing is

figuring out a way to get ambitious, creative,

innovative thinkers into K-12.

MR. WILEY: What is the stay rate?

MR. GRODD: It is high, 60 percent.

SPEAKER: Up to what period?

MR. JARVIS: For two years.

MS. FLEMAL: Teachers are underpaid.

The teachers coming to us are -- mainly teachers

who don't like being in the system. And the

teachers who are staying are largely underpaid.

They are staying because they are tenured and they

have protection. So, when --

MR. WENGER: When you tie all of these

things together, the questions are: Is the

existing system so badly broken that the time and

effort spent on it -- we've got to figure out a way

to get young people to start teaching in the

schools that are not working.

It's where we should be spending our

time or -- we can be spending our time completely

hacking the system by building new structures on

the side, either in the completely unregulated

model of the School of Everything, or TeachStreet,

or in the sort of shorter model of radically

different charter --

MS. BOYD: Again, it's a matter of

timing. I go back to the fact that the economy is

crap right now. You have an opportunity to

actually do a high-prestige, high-status shift

within the talent pool.

And this even happened with the tech

bubble. If you look at what happened when the bust

happened, unbelievable numbers of people in the

tech industry went into teaching math and computer

science at the high school level, and it actually

speeds the ramped-up CS at the high school level

because it was like all of this talent would be

like, Now I'm going to do something I can give

back, right. But whatever that narrative is that

you can leverage.

So, I think that there's social

service -- I think that we give them that -- this

organization is your investment. In trying to hack

education at a different level, it makes sense, but

there's that collective -- there's so many people

in this room. We have to go both directions.

And I do think we have to actually have

to work to think about that talent pool and to

think about a way, in the society -- that we reach

into the narrative around it. It's driving me

crazy about it all.

When women went to work outside of the

nursing and the teaching world, it basically was an

escape where you try to get out of education. So,

the gender politicking that happened in the 1970s

around education meant that we lost the prestige of

education in a whole different way that we don't

really like to talk about.

And now we finally have a whole

different gender dynamic in the workforce. We now

rethink the way traditional women's work and how

nurses and teachers and a whole variety of

traditional women's work are now considered low

prestige, even though they were always high

prestige when they were a women's only thing.

And so, there is that cultural

reworking that has to happen. And now is the time

to do that at the same time as a sort of hacking

culture.

MR. BISCHKE: I think your point about

talent, I think that's an interesting story...

There's a company in Korea called... Study. And

what they do is, they're one of the... schools

industry in Korea, but their top teachers currently

make over a million dollars a year. They sell out

sports stadiums -- it's called "Megastudy."

And they sell out sports stadiums. Ten

thousand people will come and they'll watch these

rock star English teachers. And I think that one

of the things that we like to think about is, How

do you turn teachers into rock stars? How do you

give them the attention, the appreciation that a

Mick Jagger, a Tiger Woods -- and it sounds

ridiculous right now, but there're starting to be

examples of that.

And then what happens is that a kid in

Korea grows up and sees that teacher on a billboard

when he's driving on the freeway in Korea, and he

says, "I want to be like that guy someday, I want

to be like that girl someday."

MR. WILSON: Jimmy is gone, but he told

me he's got one guy who teaches a CFA course that

sells out every -- there's a waiting -- there's a

queue to get into that guy's class. It's like 600

people sitting, you know, in an online education

platform watching this guy teach, and he's a rock

star. He makes a lot of money.

Because -- and I think the reasons why

education -- hacking education is not going to be

any harder than hacking media business... it's

about...

Session 4: Access, Funding, Scaling

************************************

*** Hacking Education Transcript ***

*** Part: 4 of 4 ***

************************************

MR. WILSON (cont): information, it's

about talent, it's about getting... out there.

I think you can actually infect the

school system from within, from things like better

lessons. When you start putting the power in the

hands of the teachers, start collaborating around

lesson plans, and you start to create teachers who

are stars because they make the best lesson plans.

All of a sudden they say, "Hey, you

know what, I'm a star." And then they're going to

start doing whatever stars in the media business

do. They say, Screw you, school, I'm a star. I'm

getting paid.

MR. JARVIS: Bob, Teri and I talked once

about that, that when you have those stars -- what

role was there for him. We talked about it, a

virtual distributed Cambridge model. He had a

lecturer and a tutor.

And to build on top of that is that at

a local level, you have the tutor who will work

one-on-one with the big-star lecturer. And there's

a new economic structure that allows the stars to

support -- because they have wide distribution; and

the tutor to support, because they have a different

relationship with the community.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: And also the trick

is when you have a star teacher, it can also be

dangerous because the revolution could actually

make it contagious for other teachers in the same

school, for the tipping point to really happen.

So, you have to create an

infrastructure that really allows it to be

legislative. There are simple things where you

don't even think about -- a course number, I want

to do this Globaloria thing; right? What is the

course number that will officially allow me to do

this as part of what I need to cover?

And then these teachers show that, the

star quality of figuring it out, and then you right

away have to put five more teachers in the same

school, in the same star atmosphere so, they would

all succeed. Because one star teacher in school

will not create the tipping point...

So, there is a system out there and it

worked. The model that worked about it, that -- it

also, all the time, has to be working with the

legislature at the top, whether through funding,

through really giving it the credit that it can

work in a system and transform.

And also from the bottom, the students

has to succeed, show up, attend, get good grades,

perform really well. More teachers than one want

to do it if everybody wants to engage students, and

it all works together like that.

So, that star thing is complicated,

much more complicated than you think.

THE SPEAKER: You said that rock star

teacher had made a lot of money. There's really no

incentive for teachers to be rock stars, again,

because -- there is no incentive because teachers

get the same amount of money.

MR. WILSON: My point is, Jim's business

is professional education; right? So, that teacher

is in the free market system and is very valuable.

And he makes Kaplan a lot of money and he makes

himself a lot of money, and that's an open

marketplace model.

I don't think we will reinvent

education without getting rid of this monopolistic

system where teachers are undervalued and good

teachers get paid the same as bad teachers.

THE SPEAKER: And that's my point.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: By the way, one

thing that we do, practically stipend all of the

teachers that work with us.

MS. SEGGERMAN: You didn't have hundreds

applications for fabulous teachers for your school?

Why do you think that was? A lot of people are

pointing out there are not good teachers around.

MS. SALEN: Because I think there's a

lot of amazing teachers out there. I think there's

a lot of amazing teachers stuck within systems that

don't let them be amazing teachers. And I think if

we provide opportunities for those teachers -- that

may be online spaces, that may be new kinds of

schools -- I think they are out there.

One thing that I -- I think we are

still stuck in this model that school is the only

-- we're trying to stuff all of the learning back

in school. I think we need to take the pressure

off the school and sort of re-imagine, Well, what

do schools do well, because they've been charged

with doing so much.

Can we take some of it out of the

schools, distribute it in the places where it is

actually done better and, again, allow the learning

to happen in most places? Because we can't fix the

school by keeping it, charging it with all that

it's still doing. It's busted. It simply cannot

support all of our expectations about what has to

happen there.

So, I think if we can figure out -- we

can figure it out, lighten the load, that might

help, and provide market opportunities for these

other kinds of innovations to begin to happen.

MR. O'DONNELL: It's feature creep.

MS. SALEN: Feature creep. Well, it's

got to do with what Diane had said earlier -- in

the early part of the century, there was this

configuration between home, church and school. And

it was understood that kids learned in those three

different places and it was really clear what was

learned in each of those three places.

And over time, the Web infrastructure

between those things split and all of it got stuck

back in the school. And so, it is too much. Yeah,

the features creeped into one space. So, yes.

MS. RHOTEN: The schools got burdened

with all of the responsibilities that were once in

a distributed set of institutions, and then they

got retrenched.

And so, they're burdened with all of

the big responsibilities but not endowed with money

to provide... we lost arts, we lost vocational.

And so, it's been shifted off, ideally, to these

other institutions who are struggling.

I looked at -- in this case of

New York, very, very hard to compliment and augment

what happens in the school. And simple things,

whether it's a virtual environment, they're finding

they can't get to the firewall in school, can't

augment... can't get standards in a way that makes

the chancellor happy; those problems, we are trying

to rebuild that network. That's the place. We'll

try to --

MR. WENGER: I want to go back to

John's comment on that. One of the key leverage

points would be to have more opportunities for

alternative systems to evolve. So, if there is one

political thing that could happen, it is the

political thing that lets more people create the

ultimate realities of schools more rapidly.

MR. WILEY: The charter movement is one

area?

THE SPEAKER: Well, it would be one.

But I think in the same way that the Internet

itself, as a collection of pipes and protocols,

provide free, relatively low-risk places to

experiment as an infrastructure, I think -- one of

the reasons we're doing this in open high schools

is because it feels like free educational content

is an important piece of infrastructure around

which these later educational innovations can

happen.

They're always paying for this per kid

every year, leasing access to it, renting access

from ...com or whoever. Starting something like

this is very expensive and there's a great cost and

risk there. So, content, I think, is one of the

most important pieces of infrastructure that needs

to be freely available to allow other these other

innovations to happen.

MR. CAULFIELD: The content conversation

get contentious, but it's important to note that if

you look at areas like the textbook industry, there

have been places where free market solutions,

albeit run through government-run schools, have

been just remarkably inefficient.

The inefficiency of when you consider

what is needed out of a textbook, K through 12,

even at college level -- and how much money has to

go into actually providing to these kids

textbooks -- it is kind of staggering. So, you

start to look at things like, in California, there

is a group of community colleges that are getting

together.

They're trying to put together a set of

open textbooks that can be shared among community

colleges. I think it comes down to this idea of

having this common infrastructure that's available

to anybody that wants to set up shop and teach.

But I think where the effort really should be put

into is developing this infrastructure, whether

it's physical infrastructure or whether it's

information infrastructure.

So that, if someone wants to set up

shop and teach, or if a institution wants to

transform how they teach, they can pool through a

common pool, and it's not this rival pool which is

creating this unnecessary expense and these

unnecessary permutations of textbooks and so forth.

Obviously, I'm biased here, being from

Open Coursework Consortium. But if I was going to

pick out a place where I think we could have a lot

of effect, it is in providing common sets of

materials open to everybody.

They either approach zero cost or are

free through subsidization of government, in some

way approach through one of those --

MR. RESHEF: Content is expensive.

However, when you look at the cost of education,

this is not the most expensive thing.

What I'm saying is that lowering it,

that says thank you, because you're enabling me to

use this free. This is very important. But the

main cost is the people, mostly teachers and the

administration and the building.

Now, if you want to save, you really

need to save on these. I think that looking at

teachers, there may be -- having less teachers,

maybe using the Internet more, maybe in the

classroom actually -- people that cost you less but

are more effective in doing other things than

teaching the student, I don't know, different ways

to look at it, that's the way to lower the

expenses.

MR. CAULFIELD: My point is kind of

along the lines of what you're saying.

If you open up to everybody that base

level infrastructure much as of a courseware is

available to people that want to try different

models with it, then you can have experimentation

with those different models on top of that. And

the experimentation, you're right, the cost that

you save by making the content freely available is

not necessarily your big savings.

But by enabling people to try different

models on top of that content, that's where you're

going to get the experimentation, that's where

you're going to get, I think, the new ideas in the

real -- in the hacking.

But you need that first level because,

again, obviously, if everybody had to come in from

the ground floor, build this up -- some people

around here have done that, but I'm sure those

people will tell you it's very expensive and very

challenging. You could make it less challenging by

building a common pool of resources.

MR. WILSON: Diana, what do you mean by

Text Shop model?

MS. RHOTEN: Are you familiar with Text

Shop?

I'm a huge, huge fan of Text Shop and I

feel like it's optimized for the downturn in the

economy, frankly. Text Shop is actually a

for-profit model, it's classified as a retail

model. But it's essentially a storefront place and

you go in and it's a maker's shop, essentially --

you can go in and you can build anything, whether

it's building up wood or building up metal --

MR. RESNICK: For fabrication purposes,

you go in and make -- you rent materials and that

should be a better maker. I think with other

people as well, it's not just the tools.

MS. RHOTEN: It's not as real, but

knowing about Text Shop and a line of advocating it

in everywhere I go. It is not -- it's really

thinking hard about the community aspect of it.

So, it's not just putting... into that space, but

thinking hard about courses, why they have the

courses, who teaches the class, who gets to teach

what. It's perfect... on Teach Street and people

are signing up. It's incredibly empowering --

MR. BURNHAM: But there are online

companions to the space?

MS. RHOTEN: We're working on the --

MR. SCHAPPELL: I never heard of Text

Shop. We have a knitting store that a friend

opened. I said, how will this work? And she has a

bunch of big sewing machines and tables and

fabrics. The place is packed. It's called

Stitches, in Seattle. And it's one of those like,

"oh, you're going to fail." To "oh, my gosh, it's

just happening with all these people, a huge online

community that are saying, I don't think -- I'm

thinking Text Shop, that would be awesome. At the

moment, you have to sign a waiver before you let me

on the chain saw.

MS. RHOTEN: Your point is good. We're

having a meeting this spring to think exactly how

to -- we're trying to help Text Shop from a variety

of angles. To bring in the legislators, to

understand Text Shop's economic development

innovation. To bring in stimulus dollars.

MR. WILSON: To teach or make stuff?

MS. RHOTEN: Yes.

MR. HEIFERMAN: How can we move further?

You know, Jeff and I are having second thoughts.

MS. RHOTEN: I just wanted to add we're

trying to getting the policy level, but we're also

really thinking about how do we build a virtual

aspect of communities. And Text Shop, should it

go, should it be successful. Well, eventually, a

network of a different types of...

MR. HEIFERMAN: Jeff and I talked for a

couple of hours, but the question of using dead

retail space for a new network of organizing

centers -- an entrepreurial effort, it can be like,

you know, new schools. I see that.

The number one problem -- there's been

two million meet-ups. The number one problem is

the space, space surveys. Starbucks won't cut the

open basement, the church won't cut it. Real good

surveys are a group of not three, four or five, but

kind of 10 to 20 people.

Like I said, how much did this space

cost? Can a group of parents that care about

coming together and making their school better,

just rent this space? Space simply doesn't exist

out there.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: In New York, it's

very hard. But yesterday, I was in Winston-Salem

and in Greensboro and High Point. These are places

that are empty, no tobacco, no wood, no furniture,

no textile; huge spaces are available, waiting.

MR. HEIFERMAN: They are padlocked.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: They're just

waiting for economic development at this time.

MR. JARVIS: We have the River Rouge of

Starbucks, you know, the world's largest. But it's

probably also that need a new second place; right?

People leave offices and jobs, they need a new

second place and there's a business there. And

Starbucks is good at coffee and mediocre at space.

You have the inverse of that.

MR. RESNICK: The school buildings

should be community centers, but there are all

these rules and regulations.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: There's also

factories.

MR. JARVIS: Google would create a

platform -- thank you for the plug. Google would

create a platform that would treat it as a platform

where you can create business on top of this, the

space maybe. And then discussion on Twitter while

other people from the outside say that the space

should be free.

But if you want to reserve the space,

it would cost you. If you want the broadband, it

would cost you. If you want the social services,

there are maybe ways to make a good business of

this. I think, Fred, we will be putting it before

we know it.

MR. SHEFRIN: There's a start up in

Seattle. They're building a platform including 50

others just like that. But they're creating a

platform for people to list their rooms. The

companies can list their conference rooms, they

have somebody to manage them. You can choose to

have overhead projectors, coffee, any amounts that

-- you basically --

MR. HEIFERMAN: If anyone wants to

develop that business as a retail developer, we'll

license the name.

MR. WILSON: You know, Rob, you have

done this right now. You did this with Etsy's

offices in Brooklyn. And then you did it again in

Red Hook, where you actually put in saws and --

MR. KALIN: It's a 9,000 foot work

space, but a space to make stuff isn't enough...how

to make a living. And education isn't available in

Text Shop... through board here. There's a huge

space in Brooklyn, they have something --

What I'm trying to do is create what I

call Parachute, there's thousands of Parachutes

around the country... with a name in it. And the

stuff made by the Parachute, you have a little

Parachute icon and a number. You can go to

Parachute and look at number of it, see where,

what, you bought the name. This shirt has a little

Parachute in the back and 101.

But each one of these Parachutes can

have a variety of resources. You can have this

studio space or it can have sewing machines. You

can have Text Shop. And it all gets listed in the

directory.

But I've found landlords who were

interested in giving free, low rent for these large

spaces. And I know three such landlords. One who

owns half of Kingston. What are you buying... in

upstate New York.

And they want to economically

revitalize these towns by putting these Parachutes

in them. That's one of the group of projects I'm

playing on. There's a huge demand for it.

So, the demand for the education side,

this is as much about learning how to make stuff

and learning how to make a living.

Its like the aphorism, give a man a

fish and you'll feed him for a day; but teach him

how to fish, and he'll have fish for a lifetime.

We've got to teach them how to sell fish so they

can --

(Laughter.)

MR. RESNICK: And when the lake dries

up, teach them how to do something else, as well.

MR. CAULFIELD: And teach those people

how to fish.

MR. KALIN: Teach them how to teach

other people how to fish. There's more to life

than eating and fishing.

(Laughter.)

MR. GRODD: I'll say one thing about the

monopoly issue. I think that is the fundamental

issue, sort of the detriment to creating a good

school culture in K through 12. And I think a good

school culture is key to the teachings and

learning. And so, I think the only way to hack the

monopoly is through competitions and creating good

schools and giving parents a choice.

So, the charter movement -- and I think

the charter school is doing a lot of good stuff.

Whether or not it can scale it is a good question.

I'm not convinced that it can.

MR. WILSON: Stop there. You can't

scale because there's not enough charters out there

or there's not enough people?

MR. GRODD: There are the schools that

get a lot of press, sort of these incredible

schools with really high student achievement, based

on standardized tests, in the narrowest sense of

the term. Is the system there in place which you

can tell the system, but it's the people

implementing the system. You will find people like

me, 20 something, Ivy League.

MR. KALIN: But that's the old system.

If you reinvent it to what Dave Wiley is saying --

that human capital problem, and you will be able to

scale.

MR. GRODD: I'm talking about my current

charter.

MR. BURNHAM: What Rob is saying is

that -- well, I don't know what Rob is saying.

(Laughter.)

MR. BURNHAM: The point is that if you

create an environment that's an inspiring place to

work, that's attracted to a 20 something from an an

Ivy League, where it's a meaningful way to invest

your life and not become a drone in the bureaucracy

where there's a lot of uninspiring people

surrounding you, then there's a real chance that

you'll solve that human capital problem, as well.

MR. HEIFERMAN: It's how do you appeal

to the 98 percent of college graduates who are not

graduating from Ivy League schools and turning them

into great teachers by letting the best practices

emerge through systems like Alex's?

And in general, my take from Fred's

point was the rock star. The rock star teacher

isn't about teaching at Yankee Stadium like the

story over here and making a million bucks. It's

about having their reputation in the teaching world

be the rock star, because people are using their

lesson plan, using their --

MR. GRODD: We are trying to do that

without a platform to do it, but we're arguing

that.

I think charter schoolss, the reason I

don't think their current scalable in the current

form because is they're currently driven by 20

something, Ivy League types for two for

three years.

MR. SACKLER: And so, High Tech High is

a 2,000-seat school as an extension of their

program. It's going to be an interesting

experiment.

MR. WILSON: I think if we're going to

do political advocacy, I think we should try to

make it legal for kids to opt out of classes in the

public school system that suck, and take the

classes online instead and be able to get credit

for that. In that way, my kids would opt out --

either you send a kid to the private school or the

public school, you can't opt out on a class by

class basis.

MR. JARVIS: That's the voucher system.

MS. SALEN: That is happening. There's

a school, a public high school called the I School

opening this fall. And that's their model, that

kids are able to take online courses as part of

their course work. So, that, I don't think that is

a dream, that's a reality. That's happening now.

MR. WILEY: In Utah, at our charter

school, we're not allowed to require students to

attend more than three-quarters time. They can use

the rest of that time to take online classes or to

go to a second school --

MR. WILSON: And they can get credit for

online classes?

MR. WILEY: Yes.

MR. WILSON: I don't think that exists

in New York.

MS. SALEN: It is. The high school

does.

MS. FLEMAL: The teacher is

intrinsically rewarding or somehow recognized or

somehow empowering for you. And typically what

happens, and this is a story I hear over and over

when I'm interviewing teachers for the private

jobs, is, "I'm a good teacher, I do a great job,

and what happens? I get all the difficult cases

put into my classroom. I get all the tough kids.

I have got 30 kids now in my classroom and 25 of

them are the problem kids. After three or four or

five years, I'm beaten down, I can't handle it

anymore."

So the best teachers are the ones that

get all the problem kids, and the least capable

teachers are the ones who don't. Those teachers

aren't being rewarded. Whatever you want to call

"being rewarded," whether it's a pat on the back,

whether it's a showcase, whatever the reward is,

theyre not getting rewarded.

MR. KALIN: The system that does

succeed, the system that is the dominant system in

20 years, is going to be one that solves the hum

capital problem. When it create more teachers, it

will be a successful system.

MR. GORDON: I disagree. Here is why I

disagree. I'm going to disagree with numbers

rather than adjectives and tone of voice. I would

submit that an independent school of 15 kids per

class costs $30,000 a year tuition with the capital

cost of the school for free.

If you build in the capital cost of the

school and depreciate it over 30 years and you put

in the outside cost, I would submit a kid going to

an independent high school in a city costs $60,000

a year.

And those kids, about a third of the

teachers that they get are not good enough. So,

you can get a third of the teachers who are kind of

public-school-quality teacher for 60 grand a year

all in, and the public schools, not including the

cost of -- they don't include the capital cost of

the buildings, which they should, because most

public school districts should be selling buildings

now, in my opinion. But $60,000, we need to get it

to $5,000 a year to scale.

MR. KALIN: You're thinking inside the

current system.

MR. GORDON: No, not quite. I'm saying,

if you decide to do it with people and you go to a

school where there is one adult for every six kids,

that costs $60,000 a year, fully loaded.

MR. KALIN: If the teachers doing

nothing but teaching those kids.

MR. GORDON: No, if there's six adults

per student.

THE SPEAKER: But that's not a necessary

number.

MR. GORDON: Okay. Well, if you do any

kind of ways. So, yes. So, take it to 15 -- so,

you can take it to 30, I would submit. So, take it

to some number. You could take it to one, it's

$250,000. If you take it 50, then it's $5,000 plus

the cost of the --

So, to try to argue the numbers, I'm

saying I know really well independent school --

MR. KALIN: The music industry's kind of

a way on how much to record an album when, people

didn't have laptops, they could record at home.

MR. GORDON: I'm sorry. Try to talk

with numbers. I'm trying to take it with numbers.

MR. BURNHAM: Well, the way Rob -- the

disagreement here is, one is facilities-based and

one is not facilities-based.

MR. GORDON: Facilities plus materials

plus people; if you pay the people. So, we need to

get it to $5,000.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: Why five?

MR. GORDON: Because that's the

number -- I think that's the number that the State

of California thinks they pay on average

out-of-pocket per student; 5 to $6,000. So, pick a

number or take -- who knows how many students are

per year --

MR. JARVIS: Who says we have classes

the way we have?

MR. GORDON: That's not the point to all

of this.

MR. JARVIS: Where the cost can come way

down, where the rock star teacher can teach

thousands with minimal support and get better

education out there; and the support comes from

fellow students and you get radically new models,

they're supported by frameworks to do things that

reduce the cost way down and make maybe a lot of

the space irrelevant.

MR. GORDON: Perfect.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But there's always

professional development.

MR. GORDON: We need to get the full

cost per person, about $5,000 of the US GNP that

can't afford arbitrage.

MR. JARVIS: We may arbitrage that.

MS. ALLEN: Why don't we just have --

why does space return in the conversation? Because

you're right. Everybody is talking about the

concept of space for the last 15 minutes, it's how

important it is.

MR. JARVIS: Open and flexible space

that people can use in various ways, that you can

hold a class at any way. You don't necessarily --

the community doesn't have to own --

MR. BISCHKE: I think there's some

courses that drive the cost way down. One of my

friends runs a site called Grocket, which is a

benchmark company, and they're focused on students

to learn. So, it's a game you play alongside other

people.

When you get the question all right,

the game moves on to the next question. When one

person gets the question wrong, the game stops.

Everybody discusses amongst each other without

knowing what the right answer is, what the learning

concepts are.

Now, that's something where there's so

much knowledge locked up in student's heads that as

we develop systems and software to allow students

to teach each other, you can drop the cost way

down.

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: But I think the

cost of virtual, even virtually nonphysical

professional development and training for and

innovation, when you have to take -- all the range,

from not very qualified or talented to the most

talented and faster learner type of instructors or

teachers to really scale is the largest cost.

You said "people," but I don't know if

you meant that. Even if you run a one hour once a

week session for people to come and learn how to

teach and learn in a new way in the system, even if

they don't end up in a physical space; that's from

my analysis of budget in the last three years when

we were running Globaloria, is the largest cost

item.

MR. KALIN: On the people side, why

don't you just require as a requirement to graduate

high school, you have to teach other people. You

show that you've learned best when you're teaching

something to other people. So, just require high

school students to teach --

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: The thesis on

teaching, on learning by teaching, but to teach

daily, a two-hour workshop, tech shop style that

we're talking about, where you really create a year

or two-year or three-year program when you start as

a beginner, you advance to the next story.

In fact, the programmatic way, it's not

something people just do. They may be very good at

it but they always need some training and that

training still costs money even if it's not

physical or virtual. And you have to consider that

in your numbers when you think about your very

creative idea.

MR. BISCHKE: I have a cousin with seven

kids who home schools them. It's like, the

15-year-old teaches the 13-year-old, who teaches

the 11-year-old, who teaches the 9-year-old. Rob's

point is right on which is, again, the best way to

learn something, to understand something, is to

teach it to someone else. And yet, in schools, we

don't do that at all.

MS. SALEN: Some of your training is

simply just -- the student who is teaching you is

also training you to teach the next student, so

there's some training involved.

MR. KALIN: And some people are better

teachers. It's also like some people are better

learners.

MR. JARVIS: I teach a course on

entrepreneurial journalism, and a business out of

this last term was a structure for teachers and

students to share video instructions in Physics

because there was a niche.

And then the community, if this works

and it takes off, will judge the best and worse and

easyest and hardest and then you'll have a platform

for more. That's one small idea and I'm sure there

are others here doing the same thing. The point is

that there is a business opportunity in that.

My fear is -- I'm on the one hand, I'm

jazzed by this, but on the other, I'm profoundly

depressed because my son is a Junior and it's

almost -- it's too late for him, I fear, and my

daughter is 12 years old and I watch her going

through the system and I don't know what to do.

And I feel like I've made terrible

mistake in saying that, yes, son, get good grades

because that's why -- because that's what we expect

in getting a good college and I'm touring them

around right now.

And he's a creator, they're both

creators and they're being taken away from

creation. And I almost feel like Rob would tell me

have them drop out tomorrow. My wife would kill

you but --

(Laughter.)

What I fear here is time, and what I

see happening in school boards politically is that

while you have the kids in, you care deeply; as

soon as your kids are out, that's somebody else's

problem.

Or while you're out of school some

people here care deeply for teaching; but the care

factor here, to get the critical mass to make the

change, I just fear, is not there yet. What we

need in great measure is P.R., is a movement, is

writing, is stuff.

MR. RESNICK: One model that I like --

citizen schools that started in Boston and other

cities as well, where it's using school buildings

in having people from the community come and teach

specialized workshops at the school, and

volunteering, people, architects, participate in

workshops after school.

And I think it's really getting people

who are engaged in expanding the things that they

do. They are expanding their role... So, this is

not a replacement for school. It can do some the

role that Katy was talking about, redefining what

the teacher needs to do and what the rest of the

community is being part of.

And I think the citizen schools' role

for new start-ups -- there's also a role right now

in the country, pouring out the possibilities for

the community services, public service, and a

lot... schools for 20 somethings, 30 somethings

after work all day at their investing banking firm,

law firm and people who still have their job, will

spend some time in the community school.

That's just one example. But I do

think that's an example showing how we can try to

reframe who it is doing it -- it's not just the

latch teacher, there are other people in the

community. But I think you need a whole collection

of other ways to engage the whole community in the

education effort.

MR. LOUGHRIDGE: I think there is a

really simple approach that maybe can be hatched

here now with some of the folks and their

talents -- I'm thinking of Chris -- I know in

Hawaii there's enough pain with how the public

schools are not working out.

I think it's harder to get into a

private school in Hawaii than it is to get into

Harvard literally. So many people want to get out

of that system. But there's a super simple tool,

SST, where you can get involved -- it's something

that the PTA can use, for maybe a goal setting with

teachers and principals.

I feel that the tough things that we

have now to effect change or problems in

accountability and transparency -- and if there is

a way to tackle that with a social networking tool

that's inclusive versus...

Some way to engage teachers and

principals locally, school by school, using this

tool, where a parent can sit down with the

teachers, administrations and say, "This is what we

are going to work on; because we have a problem

with math in your school or we want to bring in

robotics," whatever it is, just be a part of --

MR. HUGHES: I think that's a fine idea.

But what I'm more interested in is what tools can

actually enter the classroom to make it so that

students can learn from other students who are in

the same room or halfway across the world; or

engage with games that people have begun to

create --

How does that integrate with the rest

of the curriculum that the teacher or facilitator

can be categorized. I think that's where the real

paradigm shift is here now, where people can learn

from other experts regardless of their age,

regardless of their background, and be judged or

assessed on what they actually take in or what they

put out. I think that's where --

MR. BURNHAM: You have to get into the

classroom. I think what we're hearing about -- to

answer Jeff's questions about what do you do with

your children is, you begin to work around the

limitations of the classroom and you find a tutor,

and Fred's hired a guy to teach his kids how to

code.

That's the kind of perspective that you

can have when you sit in this room and you have the

education that you had and the resources that you

have. But I think that to the degree that we can

make these resources more broadly acceptable, what

Shai is doing, what David is doing and then begin

to make parents more aware of them. You can begin

to work around that.

I think the hardest problem that we

have is not whether or not the technology could

create real value inside the classroom; the hardest

problem is how you get it inside the classroom.

MR. KALIN: A million student march.

All the students get together and say, We're sick

of this education, we don't like it --

MR. BURNHAM: No school administrator

ever said that Facebook is now allowed on our

campus.

(Laughter.)

MR. O'DONNELL: In fact, the opposite --

MR. HUGHES: If you give everybody a $200

computer, not just the use of technology but the

new structured history lesson around whatever the

given topic is... not the major things that we

keep talking about, like force kids to, like,

interact with and tell me was that truthful, what

was actually, you know, bullshit, and actually make

all of the decisions and then integrate into some

type of creative work letter, say paper or

presentation of video or whatever.

But I think that's the challenge, it's

getting that technology in the classroom and using

teachers as being facilitators rather than -- which

is a whole paradigm shift from everything else.

MR. WENGER: When you think about how

much it costs to every student in the United States

a net book with full Internet access compared to

the cost of the AIG bail out.

MR. O'DONNELL: I disagree. I don't

think it should be in this classroom at all. The

worst thing I've ever done is teach a class in a

computer room where everyone is sitting in front of

a computer that's connected; because absolutely

nobody pays attention, they were just instant

messaging with their friends or whatever.

I think outside the classroom,

especially in situations where you are teaching the

kids how to access resources, the content, other

students who are learning the same thing, on the

off hours, when the teachers might not be able to

reach or wait for the teachers to reach them on

their own time.

Because in the classroom, I think it

can be a distraction; but outside, if there is a

support systems especially in situations where

maybe parents don't know the same language as the

kids in the classroom, they don't have the parental

support around the education, stuff like that, to

be able to access those resources.

MR. HUGHES: I understand where you're

coming from, and there's a debate raging around the

country about whether or not students should be

able to have laptops. I think the problem there is

just -- you just need to build a software that does

real time assessment.

So, if you have given a task or given a

problem or you're trying to teach a given topic you

should be able to know which of your students are

actually engaging with that topic or whatever

they're doing online.

MR. JARVIS: Or at some point it's up to

them. At some point they're responsible.

MR. HUGHES: I'm talking about younger.

MR. JARVIS: Graduate students.

MR. HUGHES: Twelve-year-olds who are on

Facebook. But maybe you have those different

channels where you also see software development so

you can assess what --

MS. HAREL-CAPERTON: I think that you

don't realize that most public schools don't have

computers in the classroom and maybe -- but also

they don't have it at home, and to answer your

question in this debate, the only way is to really

post in a place where teachers are looking, that

there is this innovation and what you're looking

for teachers to be patient about it and want to do

it; and you work with them and then try to advance

to get the principals and decision makers and the

school.

That's what we are doing and it works

really, really well; but you really have to make

sure that they have the bandwidth, the

infrastructure, the computers and everything in

order to work with them from within.

Once it works, then after a year the

school sees that something did happen, they may

actually -- whether it's writing for grants or

asking for funding to bring more computers, more

productivity, but they have to see that that

configuration is monitored towards the classroom is

happening.

And that is happening all around. It's

an old trick. And this is -- so far, my knowledge

is how innovation spreads in schools. The answer

to the question "how did we get it there" is really

to identify those teachers. So, not necessarily

techie but passionate as to what extra time to make

it work and demonstrate because they're excited

about doing something new. And that's really how

it works so far in the research.

MR. GORDON: Fred, to add to your idea

about the vouchers. How about the idea of about a

$100,000 check to a family who successfully gets a

kid a GED home school? Just thanks, and here's a

hundred thousand. That would probably create

activity.

MR. WILSON: Who is funding those

$100,000 checks? You and me?

MR. GORDON: We already are, Dude. With

half a billion dollars we're paying $10,000.

MR. WILSON: We're not going to get the

government do it; right? They are not going to do

it.

MR. GORDON: They already are. Instead

of doing it by credit, here's the only outcome we

care about -- we want the kids in jail until

they're 18 or until they're 16, and they're run

down jails and we want the GED. That's all we

really care about.

We don't care is they're smart enough

to vote, obviously. We don't care if they

understand science, obviously. All we want is a

GED and get the government out of it. Sell the

jails.

MS. ALLEN: A small anecdote on the

issue of technology in all schools and to

underscore the fact that any conversation on

education needs to take a whole bunch of other

factors into account, which are pretty absent from

our conversations.

I've served on a board of the

University of Chicago Charter Schools for a number

of years. We had to quit because kids were getting

attacked. First, we tried school buses so that

they didn't have to walk home, but that wasn't

enough and it's super expensive. So, it wasn't a

sustainable program, just because of various social

factors.

MS. FLEMAL: I live for technology, but

I'm not sure that it is worthwhile putting it into

any more classrooms.

MR. KALIN: Technology is the software,

not the hardware.

MS. FLEMAL: And you have to keep

updating the technology instructors. What I do is

tell kids -- I keep sending people to the Apple

store, that's where I send my students. "Go to the

Apple store and sit there for free classes and you

will get the most up to date instruction." I'm not

sure it's worthwhile.

MS. SEGGERMAN: I always ask, why does

education seem to be the last thing we're going to

get a handle on? Technology seems really well used

in the corporate sector, in health corporations,

the military obviously knows how to do it, politics

is starting to totally get it.

Why, when most of us are parents, we

care about education, why is it that technology and

education as a marriage is like the last?

MR. WENGER: That may be the perfect

way to wind up. I think what they refer to is that

the hacking that is taking place is taking place on

the outside and that's, I guess, where innovation

tends to come from, largely.

And the reason, I think, that the

school itself is going to be last place it takes

place, is it's the system that's the most tightly

controlled by lots of different interests; and that

slows down innovation because the big system and

the innovation doesn't fit inside the existing

system and the system changes slowly.

MR. SHEFRIN: I think this idea of the

inside and the outside is really critical and I

think the role of education really is to make a

porous wall between those things. That's what

schools and education really should be about right

now.

We're living in a time where we have

access to all of those things, and we're moving

back and forth. So, what's happening on the

outside needs to be able to move in a revolving

door and be brought into the inside and back out

again.

And I really do think that's the role

of education. And I also want to say that lots of

conversations today were about what's happening in

the public schools and also at that level of

education. And I think the next teachers, to think

about teachers as innovators, innovators as

teachers in the relationship, the paradigm between

those two things.

And what happens all the way through,

the next teachers and innovators are the kids in

kindergarten right now and the kids that are

graduating college right now.

And what the continuum is between that

whole range I think is critical to be able to

understand and to know also that it goes both ways,

that it's not just kindergarten up to college, that

that learning goes back and forth in a continuum.

So, I do really think that the inside,

outside -- as the outside becomes more acceptable,

things that would happen in the after-school

programs and what students and teachers have access

to now are easier to fold back in in may ways.

What the classroom is, the idea about

what the classroom is, is the real question, what

is it, where is it, what happens inside and then

outside of this and maybe to not be able to think

about inside and outside as two separate worlds.

So, I think a lot of what needs to be

happening in education is that what happens to the

students is, they are finding a way to be in the

world that's meaningful. And then I think the way

we begin to think through these things is what

makes that happen and then tell the students to

really empower so that what happens is also

initiated from them. We have to find a way to do

that.

MR. WENGER: We have promised more time

to talk in smaller groups. I want to thank

everybody for being here but I also want to

encourage everybody to continue the conversation

with the part of the group or on the Wiki or just

through connections established today. I think

that's how ultimately we will carry out the

ultimate hack of education, creativity in all of

us. Thank you all.

(Time noted: 4:10 p.m.)

(Applause.)

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download