Last week, I attended and presented at Tech and Learning Live in Dallas. This is one of my favorite events of the year, because it is by its very nature extremely collegial and conversational, whether in sessions or in the numerous snack breaks (another reason it is a favorite). After a morning session on blended learning, I got into a discussion with a colleague who I highly respect on the goals and potential of blended learning. I had heard much during the session on how the district from which he came was looking at blended learning as a tool to increase student literacy levels and, of course, test scores. I see lots of potential for blended learning as, optimally, a tool for increasing student choice, creativity, and engagement, with test results being a positive side effect. During our discussion, my friend stated something to the effect that schools had to get test scores up “so they can then do the fun stuff.” Knowing the realities of the very oppressive accountability systems we have in place, I sympathize 100% with this point of view, but I don’t necessarily embrace it. Which brings me to the question of the day:
Which is the right approach?
- Go for high test scores using whatever means necessary with the belief that more engaging, authentic learning will be possible once the unappealing stuff is knocked out.
- Go with more learner-centered, engaging, and authentic learning and have faith that the tests will turn out fine.
While there is an obvious, pie-in-the-sky ideal answer here, the tough realities faced by schools make this a much harder question to answer than at first glance. What do you say? What is your school or district’s philosophy?