Transcription
THE LEARNING SYSTEMKENNETH H. SILBERA NEW APPROACH TO FACILITATING LEARNING BASED ON FREEDOM,THE FUTURE, AND EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGYThis article by Dr. Kenneth H. Silber was originally published in Audiovisual Instruction, September 1972 and is usedwith permission from the Association for Educational Communications and Technology.This article is a very brief version of the concepts presented in the Learning System Simulation done by Dr. Silber at theAECT Convention in Min neapolis. Due to space requirements, only the highlights are presented here. The full system will bedescribed in the Simulation, which will be published this fall.Many of the concepts expressed here are the result of collaboration with Dr. Ronald Barnes, Minnesota Experi mental City,and Dr. Milton A. Young, University of Connecticut. However, Dr. Silber accepts respon sibility for all ideas presented here.Playing the game of “What’s Wrongwith America’s Public Schools?” hasthreatened, in recent years, to become America’s number one sport.And while the game playing is perhaps excessive, the reasons for it arestill quite evident in the schools.Without getting into a repetition ofa listing of faults which is probablyfamiliar to, if not believed by, everyone, it is safe to say that the real question is not whether the schools needimprove ment, but rather whetherthey need minor, major or radicalchange — and what that changeshould be like.Most critics and reformers of theschool have taken the position thatthe change needed is a minor one—such as the addition of systematically designed instructional modules,the develop ment of a Black studiesor woman’s studies or process curriculum, the reorganization of schoolfinancing procedures, or the creationof alterna tives within the schoolsystem. Most of these solutions andtheir obverses, converses and inverseshave been tried — and the resultshave always been the same: no realimprovement of what happens to achild (perhaps even your child) inschool.Why have all these reforms hadno real effect? The answer is, I believe, twofold: the magnitude andcomplexi ty of the school system, andfailure to look at basic assumptions.RATIONALEInadequacy of Proposed Solutionsto School ProblemsThe school system in America today is a vast set of bureaucraticallyorgan ized systems and subsystems,group and counter-groups, whichinteract and counteract until whatthe schools are supposed to do finallyreaches the child in the classroom.Yet all but one of the six sets of proposed solutions which follow operateon the assump tion that all the problems of the public schools come fromone small item, and that by changingthat item — whether it be wherethe money comes from, how manykids are in a class, what the curriculum says about Blacks, or whetherit is said by book or film — all theschool’s problems will dissolve. As aresult, when looked at in terms of thetotal school structure, the proposedchanges are hardly different from whatnow exists. And not surprisingly,therefore, these changes, when tried,have made no appreciable differencein what happens to learners.The second reason, however, iseven more basic and more importantthan this. It is that all these solutions1
THE LEARNING SYSTEMA new approach to facilitating learning based on freedom, the future, and educational technologyKENNETH H. SILBERbeg the real question. They are bandaid solutions to symptoms instead ofan attempt to first find the real problems. They never ask the real question about learning, and about whatkinds of institutions best facilitate it.That is, they never question the basicassumptions and structures of thecurrent system. They demand newtypes of schools, curricula, methods,and teachers without first ascertaining if schools, curricula, methods,and teachers are the best things tohave for learning and/or education.Critics in the “deschooling” movement, led by Ivan Illich, believe thatthe very notion of “school” itself isthe problem. They find that school —and its notions of simulation of reality, of authority, and of curriculum—and learning are antithetical.If, as the deschooling critics suggest, it is the elitist, specializationand simulation of reality notions ofschool that create the problems, thenit makes little difference whether theschool is repressive or free, whiteor Black — it is still a school. If it isthe compulsory, arbitrary authorityof a knowledge elite (teachers) thatmakes students powerless, then itmakes little difference whether theteacher is white or Black, maintainsor plays at giving up her authority, uses films or not — she is stilla teacher. If it is a curriculum thatlimits people’s conceptions of whatlearning is and where it can takeplace, then whether it is in Spanish orEnglish, tells the truth or lies aboutIndians, teaches courses about relevant things or is irrelevant, it is still acur riculum.Thus, the proposed solutions mayserve as temporary restraints, temporary means of patching a piece of thesystem, temporary means of keepingthe system limping along with theillusion that all is now well. But theywill never create a viable educationalsystem.Creating a New SystemHow can such a system be created?The answer to this question goesback to the second reason for failure.To create an educational system thatworks, one must first go back and askbasic questions about the necessityfor and shape of that system: First,one must ask questions about thenature of man. Then, one must derivefrom that nature how learning takesplace. Then, based on the nature ofman and how learning takes place,one must decide what, if anything,must be created to help people learn.Then, if some sort of learning systemis necessary, one must specify itscharacteris tics and show how theyare congruent with the nature of manand learning. Finally, from the characteristics of the system, the components and operation can be derived,with special emphasis on the congruence between them and the characteristics. (It is at this bottom levelthat most proposed solutions fail.)This is the approach to solutionstaken by the Learning System described in this article. Each step proceeds logically and congruently from abasic philosophy of man and learning.In this way, it is hoped that the Learning System can provide a real solutionto the problems of education in America today and in the future.Philosophies Underlying theCurrent Educational System andthe Learning SystemThe current educational systemhas a philosophy that deals withthe nature of man and learning. Itsphi losophy must be judged not bythe words it uses, but rather by thebehav ior of its personnel, by its structure, and by its mode of operation.This philosophy is detailed in Column 1 of the chart (see “EducationalSystem Philosophy/Learning SystemPhilosophy”).It would seem that in light of whatwe know about man, and in light ofwhat we can guess the future will belike, this philosophy is exactly theop posite of what we need. In orderto help people develop the ability to“be” and to “function” both now andin the future, a system that aspires tofacili tate learning must operate under a very different philosophy. Thisphilos ophy must take a diametricallyop posed view of the nature of man,his relation to his world, and his process of learning. Such a philosophy— one to form the basis of a newLearning Sys tem — is presented inColumn 2 of the chart.Other Rationales and SystemsWhat might a means for facilitating learning based on this philosophy look like? Several authors havedescribed their conceptions in veryimportant books: George Leonard’sEducation and Ecstasy, R. Buckminster Fuller’s Educational Automation,Ivan Illich’s Deschooling Society, CarlRogers’ Freedom to Learn, and Robert Theo bold’s An Alternative Futurefor America II. All present learningsystems, or parts of systems, based onsuch an “open” or “free” philosophy.The Learning System presented inthis article is an attempt to synthesizepieces from each of these systems, toadd the concepts of educational tech nology, to add some original concerns and ideas, and to come up witha “comprehensive” Learning System.2
THE LEARNING SYSTEMA new approach to facilitating learning based on freedom, the future, and educational technologyKENNETH H. SILBERDefinition of a Learning SystemBased on the open philosophy andon the rationales of futurologists, hu manists, educational technologists,and deschooling advocates, the following statements of definition canbe derived for a Learning System: A Learning System has as its purpose to bring people into contactwith resources for learning. A Learning System is a systemwhich provides: a compilation of data about re sources for learning; a means for creating and storinglearning resources; a means for access to learning re sources.One might ask why, in the light ofthe philosophy on which the Learning System is based, there is a needfor any system for learning at all?Why doesn’t the philosophy leadto the absence of any system and tomerely turning people loose to learn?The answer lies in the fact that whilepeo ple do not need teaching or motivation to learn, they also do not learnin an isolated, sterile environment.They learn by interacting with information, things, people, and institutions.The next question, then, is if theseexist in great abundance in thenatural environment, by just turning people loose, would they notcome in contact with these resourcesand learn from them? That is almosttrue, except for one small problem— “contact.” In order to learn fromthe resources, one must locate them,obtain access to them, and interactwith or observe them. How does onelocate the en v ironment in which tolearn a certain thing? Could one, forexample, learn to make pottery in aEducational System PhilosophyLearning System Philosophy Man is basically evil, and needs to be con trolled and socialized in order to fit into asociety. Man is basically good, and can grow onhis own into a civilized being — given thechance. Man does not want to learn — he must bemotivated to extend himself. Man always wants to learn — he is essen tially a seeking, learning animal. Man cannot learn on his own — he must betaught. Man learns on his own, in his daily inter action with his environment. Some types of learning are better or moreimportant than others. Different types of learning are just different— no value judgment can be mode. Learning is preparation for life, and is there Learning is life and life is learning — thefore removed from life.two are merged into one. At some time in their lives, people stoplearning and start living. No one ever stops learning as long as he isalive — to stop learning is to die. An experience is learning only if it takes Any experience the person experiences,place in a specially sanctioned environmentno matter where and under what circum —what takes place outside of that environ stances, is real learning.ment is not real learning. There is a group of people which is apriori qualified to make decisions for otherpeople. All people must be involved in the deci sions that affect their lives. There is a group of people who are quali fied to sanction education experience forothers and tell them what to learn. An individual is the sole and best judge ofwhat educational experiences are best forhim—he may seek advice from others, butno one may dictate to him. The learner is subservient and has no rights. The learner is equal and has all rights ofmen. Knowledge is the sole province of a fewskilled professionals; it is a mystery to themasses. Knowledge belongs to the masses—it isgenerally available to all. This philosophy calls for a closed systemwith opposing philosophies not tolerated,the underlying philosophy hidden, the phi losophy closed to change. The philosophy calls for an open systemwith opposing philosophies an integralpart, the underlying philosophy open, thephilosophy open to change. This philosophy violates the United StatesConstitution, Bill of Rights, and Declarationof Independence. This philosophy follows the intent and theletter of the United States Constitution, Billof Rights, and Declaration of Independence.100-acre Okla homa wheat field withnothing else but wheat, and couldone learn to grow wheat in a California potter’s studio with nothingbut clay and a wheel? There must besome way for a person to know wherethe environments are — and thereare many —from which he can learna given thing. And once one has located the environment, how is he tobecome part of, or an observer to it?Is he to barge in and demand to usethe wheel or plant the seed, or is heto peer in the window? There must3
THE LEARNING SYSTEMA new approach to facilitating learning based on freedom, the future, and educational technologyKENNETH H. SILBERbe some way for a person to gain access to the envi ronments from whichhe can learn.This leads directly to Illich’s suggestion for a learning network. Thiswould provide the learner with information about, and access to, learn ingpeers, expert models, things, andmentors. This network is an excellent place to start in setting a modelfor the Learning System. However,the net work has several shortcomings. The most important concernswhat hap pens when the networkdoes not have the resources to meetthe learner’s needs; this may occurbecause the network does not listthis type of resource, or because thistype of resource does not exist. Forexample, suppose a learner wanted tolearn pottery, but was terribly shy anddid not want to learn from an expertpotter. What he wanted was clay, awheel, and a film on how to makepottery. If the network does not list“educational materials,” then it mighthave to tell the learner that it couldnot provide the resource even thoughit existed on film.A second shortcoming is that thelearning network assumes that thelearner knows what he wants to learnwhen he queries the network. If hedoes not know, then the networkdoes not provide any means to helphim obtain guidance in decidingwhat he wants to learn.Thus, to remedy these shortcom ings, the concepts of educationaltech nology from Silber and humanism from Leonard can be added tothe learning network of Illich to create a Learning System. This has theeffect of doing three things: First, itbroadens the range of resources thatthe learner can be put in touch withby including the full range of educa-tional materials and equipment. Second, it creates a means for developingresources which are requested bylearners but which do not exist, and ameans for storing those resources until they are needed. Third, it broadensthe meaning of access to include helpin accessing if it is re quested.It might seem, however, that byadding these features to the learningnetwork, and transforming it intoa system, we have gone back to thecon cept of a school — a special placefor learning — which violates thephiloso phy of the Learning System.The best way to see if this is true isto go beyond the definition of theLearning System and to look at itscharacteristics. These characteristicstake the definition to a more specificlevel by presenting the guidelines forthe system operation.CHARACTERISTICS OF THELEARNING SYSTEMIt is not unique for a system to havecharacteristics. What is unique is toplan those characteristics in advanceand to: Make those characteristics con gruent with the philosophy and def inition of the system. Arrange the characteristics so thatthey may be easily changed by theparticipants in the system. Use the characteristics as criteriafor the participants to evaluate andchange the system if it does not operate according to the characteris tics.The Learning System characteristics are congruent with its goals, caneasily be changed by all learners, andare used to evaluate the success ofthe Learning System. This unique useof its characteristics is designed tostop the Learning System from turning into an entrenched bureaucracywhich operates for its own sake instead of for the purpose for which itwas originally intended.In order for a Learning System tobe a compilation of resources anddata about resources and a means foraccess to those resources, the Learning System must possess the following char acteristics: Learning System and control. Alldecisions in the Learning Systemremain ultimately in the hands ofthose affected by them. The Learn ing System provides a free networkof resources, and not a controllingeducation. Learning System and experi mentation. The Learning System isexperimental. The process of con stant, ongoing evaluation and self -renewal is built into the LearningSystem. Learning System and the learn er.Everyone is considered a learn er throughout his whole life. Ev eryone is considered a resourcethroughout his whole life. TheLearning System is a zero-rejectsystem. The Learning System isac countable to the learner. Failureis Learning System, not learner,based. Learning System and its organi zationand operation. The organi zation andoperation of the Learn ing Systemare built around the learner andfacilitating his learning. The Learning System is integrated with othersystems in the city. The LearningSystem is a full-time operation. TheLearning System uses the most sophisticated tech nological conceptsand machines to develop and provide access to learn ing resources.The Learning System is based on a4
THE LEARNING SYSTEMA new approach to facilitating learning based on freedom, the future, and educational technologyKENNETH H. SILBERbroad-range, open- ended bank oflearning objectives which provideaccess to a wide range of learningexperiences.One of the best ways to understand the Learning System is to seehow it might operate. By seeing thesystem in operation, it is hoped thatthe learner will develop some framework in which to put the informationabout the com ponents which makeup the Learning System — information which follows in subsequentsections.The operation of the system will beexplained in two ways: First, a straightnarrative describing possible phases inlearning; second, a scenario, describing a family just entering the learningsystem (see Appendix, “Entry into theLearning System: A Scenario”).OPERATIONOperation of the Learning Systemfrom the Learner’s Point of ViewThe operation of the Learning System from the learner’s point of viewis the most important aspect of theLearning System. It is how he utilizesall the resources of the system to movefrom a vague gnawing that there issomething he wants to know to knowing it. Since the Learning System isneither uniform nor compulsory,there is no way to predict how any given learner will, on any given occa sion,use the system resources. To facilitatean understanding of how the systemmight work, however, it is possible totake a hypothetical learner who goesthrough all the possible steps of utilizing the system’s resources. It is important to remember that this learn er ismerely hypothetical, and that mostlearners will not want, and will not beforced to learn in this way.HOW WILL TEACHERS EARN A LIVING?If there are to be no full-time people doing what teachers and administrators do now, how will they earn a living in the Learning System? This is a verydifficult question to answer. One is initially tempted to say that an exceptionto Learning System philosophy ought to be made for this group of people inorder to allow them to earn a livelihood. However, all this would do is recreate the same educational system we are trying to avoid. The answer to thequestion lies in not thinking of the way people live in the current system, butrather to think about how they would live at The City. At The City everybodylearns, performs learning helping functions, and earns a livelihood.For some teachers, what they taught in school will be similar to real-lifeoccupations (artists, carpenters, mechanics, accountants, interior designers, writers, historians, computer programmers, scientists, filmmakers,etc.), and in addition to offering themselves as expert resources for thosewanting to learn these skills, they practice their occupation to earn a livelihood. For those who feel that they are not skilled enough in the area theypreviously taught to practice it as an occupation, and for those whoseareas provide no means of earning a livelihood, it is possible to learn another area through the Learning System. There will be jobs for some in theLearning System’s “Structured Center” — the place where those who wantstructured education instead of free learning go.This will be difficult at first, but it will be as difficult for people coming tolive in The City, for different reasons. If people are coming to The City toimprove the quality of their lives, then they must be willing to give up someof the things that cause life outside The City to need improving. To say thatwe must allow cars to be driven in The City because some people will beout of work or inconvenienced if we don’t is obviously ridiculous in termsof what we know about ecology. To say that we must keep professionalteachers and administrators in the Learning System is just as ridiculous interms of what we know about how people learn and what the school systemhas done in the post.There are 11 possible sequentialsteps a learner could go through inutilizing the Learning System. Thesesteps, with explanations, follow.Unstructured. In this phase thelearner has no particular interestin learning anything. He wandersaround the city, talks to other learners, drops by the Unstructured Center, spends some time in the StimulusCenter. Af ter some time, either because he is bored of being unstructured or because he has become interested in something, he decides hewants to learn some thing.Consultant Contact. Since he is notsure of what he wants to learn, hede cides to contact a person to serveas a personal and educational consultant, and also as a learning resourcecon sultant. He queries the Learning Objectives-Resources-InformationNet work (LORIN) from a terminalin the Stimulus Center for a list ofconsultants currently available. Here ceives a listing which includesthe names of several consultants heknows and doesn’t like, so he decidesto wait for a few hours. Later, he receives the name of a person he knows5
THE LEARNING SYSTEMA new approach to facilitating learning based on freedom, the future, and educational technologyKENNETH H. SILBERand re spects; he “makes an appointment” through LORIN.Consultant Interaction. He explainsto the consultant either his desire tolearn something specific (which hepicked up in the Stimulus Center) orhis desire to just plain do something.The consultant asks if she may seehis learner data file and, since he hasdealt with her before and trusts her,he agrees. Together, they discuss hisneeds in terms of what he knowsabout himself and what he has already learned. This does not help himnar row down what it is he wants tolearn. She makes several suggestionsand asks him for suggestions. Despitesome good interaction, they are notable to narrow down his interests beyond a global area — art.LORIN Interaction. The learnerfinally suggests using the LORINsort -down procedure to help decideon his interests. After using the sortdown, he selects a learning objective and then a learning resource.The resource is an activity whichrequires material re sources, an expertresource, a space in the ResourceUtilization Center, and two learningpeers.Resource Contact. Through the administration, human resource, andpeer learner data files, the learnermakes appointments with an expertresource and two peer learners,makes arrangements to pick up thematerials at the Resource StorageCenter, and reserves space in the Utilization Cen ter. The next morning hepicks up the materials and meets hisfellow learners and the resource.Resource Utilization. He and hisfellow learners interact with the ma terial and expert resource. They makethe responses called for in the activity, and even while they are in themidst of the experience, feel themselves begin ning to grow.Evaluation. While they feel goodabout their experience, they all agreethat it would be a good idea to usethe evaluation resources included inthe activity to see if they have reallymet their objective. The evaluationin volves performance of the skill theyhave been learning under the evaluat ing eye of the expert resource. Ourlearner and one peer do fine, but thethird is not capable of performing theskill.Data Update. The learners updatetheir learner data files, indicating thatthey have completed this objectiveand resource and whether or not theyhave met their objective. They thengive the results of their evaluationto the resource evaluation data file.Finally, they indicate to the resourceadminis tration file that the resourcesare free again.Resource Maintenance. Since ourlearner had responsibility for the ma terials resource and the facility used,he checks them both for damage andcleanliness. He puts the special divid ing wall they used in the Center backand returns the materials to the Stor age Center.Recycle. (Not Meet Objective.) Thelearner who did not meet the objective recycles to Step 2 and discusseswith the consultant the problems hehad in meeting the objective. It turnsout that he felt intimidated by theexpert resource and the fact that hethought the other two learners weresmarter than he was. They agree thathe would be better off trying the objective this time with only a materialresource and a tutor. He then goesthrough the entire process again.(Meet Objective.) Our learner methis objective and is now ready todecide what he wants to do next. Hecould recycle to Step 1 and be unstructured again; he could recycle toStep 2 and have another discussionwith a consultant; he could queryLORIN himself and find the next objective which follows the one he hasjust completed. Instead, he makes adiffer ent decision.Human Resource. He decides thatrather than be a learner in the formalsense for a while, he would like toperform one of the human resourceroles in the research and development func tion. He has already takenthe learning activities to learn theskills involved. Today he feels thathe would like to work on redesigninga film that the Resource EvaluationData file had indicated, last time hechecked, needed to be made moreeffective.COMPONENTS OF THELEARNING SYSTEMWhat components are needed ina Learning System in order to allowit to operate as indicated above? Ibelieve three types of componentsare needed: objectives, resources anddata. The objectives and resourcescomponents will be discussed in thefollowing sec tions. Data, due to spacelimitations, will not be dealt with inthis article.ObjectivePurposes of the learning objectivescomponent. The learning objectivecomponent facilitates the learner’slearning in three ways:1. It provides, through a set of stan dard descriptors, a means of ac cessing the appropriate learningres ources.2. It helps the learner identify whathe wants to learn to some degree of6
THE LEARNING SYSTEMA new approach to facilitating learning based on freedom, the future, and educational technologyKENNETH H. SILBERgenerality or specificity for eithershort-term questions or long-termlearning goals.3. It provides a basis for helping thelearner decide whether or not hehas learned what he set out to learn.One of the ways to select and access learning resources is to knowwhat you want to learn and to requestthe resources that can help you learnit. (The other is to merely browsethrough all the resources.) In orderto make such a request and to haveit fulfilled, however, there must be away of indicating what each resourcedeals with, so that when someoneasks to learn something he can puthis finger on the resource that wouldbe most helpful. This is where the“descriptors” are useful.This first way is fine for the learnerwho knows what he wants to learn;the learner who has a vague idea, orno idea at all, or who wants to makelong- range learning plans needs morehelp. He needs the learning objectives com ponent to act somethinglike a roadmap — to show him whatlearning op tions are available andhow to get there, without forcing himto go any where. He can use the objectives to help him identify where heis now, where his immediate learningdesti nation is, where his long-rangelearn ing destination is, and whatinterme diate routes to it there are. Toprovide this road map, the descriptors must be related to one anotherin a hierarchical and/or coordinatemanner which enables the learner tosort from gen eral to specific learninginterests and to identify how learningobjectives are related to other learning objectives. For example, a bewildered learner could, after searchingthrough the areas of the objectivescomponent, de cide he was currentlyinterested in “art”; he could thenbecome more specific and decide hewas interested in learning to “throwpots on a wheel” as an immediatelearning objective; or he could decide(as a long-range objec tive) to learnenough to become a “professionalpotter,” and discover what intermediate learning objectives were neededto get to that objective.Regardless of which approachlearners use in selecting their re sources, some will want to knowwhether or not they have met theirlearning objectives — can they indeed “throw a pot on a wheel” orcan’t they. With objectives stated inspecific terms, it is possible to usethese objec tives to develop evaluation resources to enable the learnerto measure his learning and to see ifhe has met his objective. Whetherthe Learning System develops formalevaluations from the objectives, orthe learner derives and applies hisown criteria to them, the objectivesprovide the basis for de ciding whether the objective has been met.The breadth and open-endednessof the learning objectives component.There is only one criterion for the inclusion of a learning objective in thelearning objectives component —one learner expressing it as a learningneed. Since the Learning System isdesigned to meet each individual’slearning needs, it must use the sum ofeach individual’s needs as the parameter w
be derived for a Learning System: A Learning System has as its pur-pose to bring people into contact with resources for learning. A Learning System is a system which provides: a compilation of data about re sources for learning; a means for creating and storing learning resources; a means for access to learning re sources.
