My interview with Big Blue Button

I recently had a chance to keynote Big Blue Button’s first-ever Global Conference. Afterward, I sat down (virtually) with Robert Hocking and we chatted about some deeper learning concepts that I had mentioned in my talk.

The half-hour video on ‘major shifts in education‘ is below. I hope that it’s useful to you. My favorite part is probably from 18:55 to 20:27 when we discuss struggling students who come alive when we provide them with a kind of different learning space.

Happy viewing!

Retrieval practice, CBE, and what we value regarding student learning

Powerful TeachingA number of educators across the country are finding great value in ‘learning science’ books such as Powerful Teaching: Unleash the Science of Learning. In Powerful Teaching, the authors focus on the potential of:

  • Retrieval practice – “pulling information out of students’ heads (e.g., quizzes and flashcards), rather than cramming information into students’ heads (e.g., lectures)” (p. 4);
  • Spaced practice – “spreading lessons and retrieval opportunities out over time” (p. 4);
  • Interleaving – “mixing up closely-related topics and encouraging discrimination” (e.g., “when students practice addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division problems all mixed up, rather than one type of problem at a time;” p. 5); and
  • Feedback – “providing [students] the opportunity to know what they know, and know what they don’t know” (p. 5).

There’s nothing inherently wrong with retrieval practice, spaced practice, and interleaving. These educational practices can be powerful tools for information retrieval. But we also have to ask ourselves the tougher question of ‘Retrieval practice, spaced practice, and interleaving OF WHAT?’ Is the information worth knowing and spending time on in the first place? For instance, in the retrieval practice challenge grid below [intentionally anonymized], many of us could argue that most of the things being ‘retrieved’ to allegedly enhance student ‘learning’ aren’t really worth learning at all, much less remembering later.

Retrieval Practice Challenge Grid

On another educational front, many advocates of competency-based education (CBE) are working diligently to create ‘high reliability’ school structures. This work often involves extremely sophisticated proficiency scaling of desired learning outcomes, student leveling diagnostics, and individualized instruction and student interventions. Here is an example third grade mathematics proficiency scale [intentionally anonymized]:

3rd grade math proficiency scale

And, once again, we have to ask ourselves the tougher question of ‘Proficiency scaling and student leveling ON WHAT?

In Future Wise: Educating Our Children for a Changing World, David Perkins noted that “the achievement gap is much more concerned with mastering content than with providing lifeworthy content. . . . The achievement gap is all about doing the same thing better… [In contrast,] the relevance gap asks us to reconsider deeply what schools teach in the first place” (pp. 30-31). Accordingly, a couple of questions that we might ask ourselves as educators include:

  • In our learning science and competency-based educational work, are the desired student outcomes that we’re emphasizing just low-level content or are they lifeworthy content? 
  • If we’re going to ask our students to ‘retrieve’ and ‘interleave’ their learning weeks and even months later, can it at least be knowledge and skills that are worth remembering?

There are at least two potential dangers as schools and educators move in these ‘high reliability’ directions:

  • Schools will continue to reinforce, strengthen, and reinscribe their typical emphases on standardized, low-level learning at the expense of more lifeworthy knowledge and skills, particularly for traditionally-marginalized students.
  • By doing so, schools will continue to reduce kids to proficiency scales, score reports, and individualized, dehumanized, numerical widgets in mechanistic, technocratic educational systems. Rather than being agents of their own learning and active, hands-on meaning-makers, students are passive recipients of processes and outcomes that are imposed on them in the name of ‘reliability.’

Both of these practices contribute to students’ learning apathy, boredom, disengagement, perceived lack of relevance in what they’re learning, and dropout rates (both physically and mentally).

Even Daniel Willingham, who, as a cognitive psychologist, is a tremendous advocate for brain-based learning and background factual knowledge, asked in Why Don’t Students Like School?, “When is it appropriate to ask students to memorize something before it has much meaning? Probably not often…” (p. 64). Willingham also reiterated that “We remember much better if something has meaning” (p. 33) and that “Repetition is good for learning but terrible for motivation” (p. 1). In other words, we have to focus on creating learning experiences that are meaningful to students, not just in a school-y ‘you need to know this for the test’ sense or in a ‘do this or you will be punished academically or behaviorally’ sense but rather in a ‘you need to know this for life’ sense. We know that most students – even successful ones – are really struggling to find meaning in most of the learning tasks that we put before them.

Willingham also stated:

Students can’t learn everything, so what should they know? Cognitive science leads to the rather obvious conclusion that students must learn the concepts that come up again and again – the unifying ideas of each discipline [emphasis added]. Some educational thinkers have suggested that a limited number of ideas should be taught in great depth, beginning in the early grades and carrying through the curriculum for years as different topics are taken up and viewed through the lens of one or more of these ideas. From the cognitive perspective, that makes sense [emphasis added]. (p. 37)

Are our school systems focusing on big important concepts or just trivia and minutiae as they engage in learning science and competency-based educational practices?

Some may wonder if it is even possible to engage in learning science and competency-based educational practices for so-called ‘deeper learning.’ The authors of Powerful Teaching do say that “these strategies apply for … critical thinking” (p. 5). However, the vast majority of the examples that they use in the book pertain to students remembering something that they read earlier, answering exam questions, taking notes, engaging in mini-quizzes, regurgitating back what they heard from a teacher, and similar, extraordinarily traditional educational practices. Higher-level thinking examples and discussions of real world thinking, application, and problem-solving are scarce in the book (as they are in our larger, societal-level conversations about ‘learning loss’ during the pandemic). The language that the authors use in the book to introduce their key concepts also emphasizes lower-level learning (e.g., practicing math problems, quizzes, flashcards, teacher lectures, and so on).

Of course students need to have factual knowledge and procedural fluency. But those aren’t enough in today’s global, innovation society (and arguably never were). Some of our lower-level student learning outcomes are important and many are less so, particularly when viewed through the lens of ‘lifeworthy content.’ But how we get there is always up for negotiation. Learning modality matters A LOT. It would be really easy to shove kids in front of a bunch of worksheets or homework packets or transmission-regurgitation / individualized-progression / box-checking software systems and say that students are achieving ‘mastery’ of supposedly ‘important’ knowledge and skills. We can see the allure of that for a large number of school leaders or policymakers. Be cognizant of that seduction, because it’s a student soul-sucking idea that’s been floating around in education for many, many decades. And vendors will be quite happy to take your money and sell this to you.

As I said in a recent keynote, I absolutely adore the idea of ‘high-reliability schools.’ But we need to make sure that our definition of ‘high reliability’ includes deeper learning opportunities and outcomes, not just the low-level learning that we’ve traditionally spent most of our time on in P-12 schools. One last time: students aren’t going to recall and regurgitate their way into 21st century life success.

I know that deeper learning networks like Big Picture Learning, New Tech Network, and High Tech High are trying to figure out what ‘high reliability’ looks like in the deeper learning context, as are the schools featured in our recent book, Leadership for Deeper Learning. The work that these students and educators are doing is incredibly complex and even more inspiring. It’s relatively easy to come up with pedagogical and data systems that help students recall and regurgitate a little better. It’s much more difficult to create educational systems that develop successful, problem-solving humans. I would encourage all of us to think pretty deeply about this: not just about how to make existing technocratic systems even more technocratic, but about what it means to be educated and successful over the next few decades. 

Your thoughts? How are you reconciling learning science and competency-based educational principles with deeper learning?

Instagram, adolescent girls, and the importance of evidence

Instagram, adolescent girls, and the importance of evidence

I’ve written on this blog before about irresponsible fearmongering when it comes to technology. It’s one thing to judiciously weigh the pros and cons when it comes to technology and our children. It’s a whole ‘nother to just throw claims out there that lack evidence.

In today’s New York Times article, Does Instagram harm girls? No one actually knows., Dr. Laurence Steinberg, Professor of Psychology at Temple University, said:

… there is a growing scientific literature on the links between social media use and adolescent mental health. But as yet it is not possible to draw any firm conclusions from it, in part because very few studies have the characteristics listed above. Of the better studies that have found a negative correlation between social media use and adolescent mental health, most have found extremely small effects – so small as to be trivial and dwarfed by other contributors to adolescent mental health [emphasis added].


Complicating matters further is that in the Facebook surveys, twice as many respondents reported that Instagram alleviated suicidal thinking than said it worsened it; three times as many said it made them feel less anxious than said it made them feel more so; and nearly five times as many reported that Instagram made them less sad than that it made them sadder.


We should be just as skeptical about correlational research that links social media use to reports of positive well-being as we are about research that reaches the opposite conclusion. But given the widespread eagerness to condemn social media it’s important to remember that it may benefit more adolescents than it hurts.

Facts matter. Truth matters. It may be that Instagram actually is more harmful to teenage girls than helpful. But until we have better evidence, let’s be careful before we make wide-ranging claims about youth and technology, okay?

Pandemic-era control and compliance

Pandemic-era control and compliance

Student cameras are required to be on!
We’ve installed monitoring software!
We’ve banned backchannels or side channels!

During the pandemic, the control / compliance focus of schools remains strong…

Image credit: Netflix

Superhero capes

During the pandemic we donned our superhero capes and finally put computers and Internet access in the hands of our students. Then most of us took our capes off and gave kids digital worksheets.

During the pandemic we donned our superhero capes and finally put computers and Internet access in the hands of our students.

Then most of us took our capes off and gave kids digital worksheets.

Books I read in July 2021

Pedagogy of the OppressedBooks I finished reading (or rereading) in July 2021…

Hope you’re reading something fun too!

Leadership for Deeper Learning: Excerpt 07

Leadership for Deeper Learning[To celebrate our upcoming book, Leadership for Deeper Learning, I am publishing an excerpt each day for a week before its release. We interviewed leaders at 30 different ‘deeper learning’ schools around the world in 2019 and 2020. We then followed up those interviews with site visits, observations, on-site photographs and videos, and additional conversations. Our goal was to try and parse out What do leaders at innovative schools do that is different from their counterparts in more traditional schools? As you might imagine, we saw some fantastic leading, teaching, and learning. We describe what we saw in detail in the new book and, in Chapter 7, articulate a Profile of a Deeper Learning Leader that’s based on empirical research, not just anecdotes. We think that this book makes a unique contribution to what we know about leadership in deeper learning schools. The book is written for a practitioner audience and is full of concrete, specific examples to get folks thinking about possibilities. Also, every main chapter concludes with Key Leadership Behaviors and Support Structures. If you order it, let me know what you think!]

Excerpt 07

Trusting Teachers as Creative Professionals

As might be guessed in schools that give students high levels of autonomy, throughout our visits we also witnessed leadership behaviors and school structures that treated teachers as creative professionals. The relationship between leaders and teachers in these deeper learning schools might be akin to how a managing partner treats architects in a design firm, for instance. Leaders set a high expectation of professionalism for teachers in the building but then provided the space and support for creativity. Few, if any, ideas were rejected outright. A culture of “Yes, try that!” permeated the buildings that we visited. There were high expectations of professional conduct and student learning outcomes, but those were embedded deeply within a culture of trust and respect.

This culture of trust then extended to the overall vision, direction, and governance of the school. We saw countless examples of teachers who were empowered to take additional – and authentic – leadership roles that went far beyond serving on a committee or helping with a school event. In our conversations, teachers could regularly explain and defend the choices that they made in their classrooms and could link those choices to the overall vision for the student learning experience. Beyond that, however, they also could describe, champion, and advocate for the choices made by the school as a unified team. The pronoun “we” was used consistently in these conversations.

Within these contexts of teacher autonomy and empowerment, teacher professional learning does not fit traditional patterns. Teacher professional development isn’t typically decided by administrators. Teacher professional development isn’t a ‘one off’ or ‘toe dip’ into whatever faddish topic du jour that school leaders think is necessary. At the schools we visited, there were high levels of intentionality, investment, and sustainability around teachers’ professional learning. Those experiences were networked. They were frequently teacher-led. And, most importantly, they were personalized to what individuals and teams of teachers needed, all within the larger context of the vision and goals of the school. In the same way that these deeper learning leaders expected their teachers to meet a high bar of creative professionalism, in turn these teachers expected their leaders to meet that same high bar when it came to fostering adult learning and professional growth within the building.

Leadership for Deeper Learning, Chapter 7


If we want deeper learning, greater student agency, more authentic work, and rich technology infusion, we have to DESIGN FOR THEM. 4 Shifts Protocol,

Upcoming travel and events

  • December 1 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • December 2 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • December 3 - Watershed School, Boulder, CO
  • December 6 - Clear Creek School District, Idaho Springs, CO
  • December 7 - Fredericksburg City Public Schools, Fredericksburg, VA
  • December 14 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • January 3 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • January 18 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • January 5 - Englewood High School, Englewood, CO
  • January 26 - Masons Cove Elementary School, Salem, VA
  • February 1 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • February 3 - Mississippi Bend AEA, Bettendorf, IA
  • February 15 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • February 23 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • April 27 - Mattoon Public Schools, Mattoon, IL
  • June 13-15 - Traverse Conference, Watershed School, Boulder, CO
  • June 15-17 - InnEdCO Annual Conference, Breckenridge, CO
  • June 17 - Hong Kong Association for Educational Communications and Technology, Hong Kong, China
  • June 25-29 - ISTE Live, New Orleans, LA

How can I be of support to you?
Get in touch!

Leadership for Deeper Learning Book Cover
Harnessing Technology for Deeper Learning
Different Schools For A Different World Book Cover
What School Leaders Need to Know About Digital Technologies and Social Media Book Cover