Education and the Future – Two Paradigms

July 12, 2015 – Young people face a very different future from previous generations. Career paths outside of hard science professions are not as secure as in the past. Any work that can be automated using robots and artificial intelligence is bound to be disrupted as the century progresses.

So how are governments planning education to meet the future?

In some cases the jurisdictions are burying their heads in the sand in an almost comic manner. While others are recognizing the challenges and trying to be pre-emptive. Here are two stories.

Texas Rewriting Curriculum

The headline sounds great but then you look under the covers and what are they changing? Scientific evidence and history by the look of it. Books cite Moses and Mosaic law as the foundation of American democracy. Capitalism is praised. Segregation is sugar coated. Grade 5 science casts doubt on anthropogenic climate change as a valid, proven concept. The Grade 6 science books claim that the science of climate change is significantly challenged by alternate theories ignoring the overwhelming number of science journal articles that provide evidence while citing the few naysayers. Evolution is disputed. And as one history professor from Southern Methodist University states, “Moses shows up everywhere doing everything.”

So one wonders how all of this nonsense science and history helps students plan for their future? To describe the learning as dangerously irrelevant is no understatement. The curriculum seems devoid of brain plasticity skill building such as critical thinking, data analysis, problem solving, adaptability, entrepreneurship, effective written and oral communication, and imagination.

Instead Texas seems trapped in a 19th century time warp. Too bad for Texas children.

Finland Stops Teaching STEM Core Curriculum

Not familiar with STEM. It stands for science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Doesn’t it seem that a country that wants its children to tackle the future would emphasize STEM, not move away from it? But that is not the case.

The Finns think they have found a better way to stimulate learning. Instead of history, students will tackle a moment in time or an historic political movement and integrate into the learning all the skill sets of mathematics, science, technology and engineering. Learn to file taxes or balance a bank statement and learn math as a result. Technology will play a significant role in all learning assignments – from robotics to advanced computing, but always within the context of an event, problem, or challenge, not a course.

At the same time Finn educators will prepare students for the jobs that will be available within their country upon graduation. Early grades will experience play-based learning. In high school subject matter will be interdisciplinary. If you study a country and its history you will also be learning its language. When you graduate you may end up working for a company with a regional Finnish office. Study a human disease challenge and learn to use scientific method, the science of genetics and genomic analysis.

What Finland is doing engages students in a fundamentally different way from Texas which continues to rely on traditional textbooks filled unfortunately with some indisputable “non-facts.” Far more challenging for teachers but absolutely aimed at achieving brain plasticity for a century where young people will need to be adaptable to change.

Some argue that literature will be diminished in this new curriculum. But all literature is based on context within the period in which the author wrote. It is interesting that in the last week Harper Lee, the author of “To Kill a Mockingbird” has released a sequel novel, “Go Set a Watchman.” If Finnish educators were integrating these important books into lessons it wouldn’t be “English Literature” they were teaching, it would be “Systemic Racism in its Historical Context.” And that curriculum might look at Jim Crow laws, analyze voter registration and job and education discrimination data from American sources, look at primary historical evidence, anthropology and the theory of race, and genetics as a tool for invalidating the rationale for prejudice.

My question for Finland is “can they pull it off?” Interdisciplinary teaching is tough. But according to a recent article in The Washington Post, Finnish teachers are better prepared than most to implement such a departure from traditional subject-based curriculum. Krista Kiuru, Education Minister states, “Teachers have a lot of autonomy….they are highly educated — they all have master’s degrees, and becoming a teacher is highly competitive.”