later you are sure to get it back. —Barbara Kingsolver
movement. The first is the temptation to
emphasize advanced, conceptual
thinking too early in training—an
approach that has proven ineffective in
numerous past reforms, such as the
“New Math” of the 1960s (Loveless,
2002). Learning tends to follow a
predictable path. When students first
encounter new ideas, their knowledge is
shallow and their understanding is
bound to specific examples. They need
exposure to varied examples before their
understanding of a concept becomes
more abstract and they can successfully
apply that understanding to novel
situations.
Another curricular challenge is that
we don’t yet know how to teach self-direction, collaboration, creativity, and
innovation the way we know how to
teach long division. The plan of 21st
century skills proponents seems to be to
give students more experiences that will
presumably develop these skills—for
example, having them work in groups.
But experience is not the same thing as
practice. Experience means only that
you use a skill; practice means that you
try to improve by noticing what you are
doing wrong and formulating strategies
to do better. Practice also requires feedback, usually from someone more
skilled than you are.
Because of these challenges, devising
a 21st century skills curriculum requires
more than paying lip service to content
knowledge. Outlining the skills in detail
and merely urging that content be
taught, too, is a recipe for failure. We
must plan to teach skills in the context
of particular content knowledge and to
treat both as equally important.
In addition, education leaders must
be realistic about which skills are teach-able. If we deem that such skills as
collaboration and self-direction are
essential, we should launch a concerted
effort to study how they can be taught
effectively rather than blithely assume
that mandating their teaching will result
in students learning them.
Better Teaching
Greater emphasis on skills also has
important implications for teacher
training. Our resolve to teach these
skills to all students will not be enough.
We must have a plan by which teachers
can succeed where previous generations
have failed.
Advocates of 21st century skills favor
student-centered methods—for
example, problem-based learning and
Even advocates of student-centered
methods acknowledge that these
methods pose classroom management
problems for teachers. When students
collaborate, one expects a certain
amount of hubbub in the room, which
could devolve into chaos in less-than-expert hands. These methods also
demand that teachers be knowledgeable
about a broad range of topics and are
prepared to make in-the-moment decisions as the lesson plan progresses.
Anyone who has watched a highly effective teacher lead a class by simultane-
We don’t yet know how to teach
self-direction, collaboration, creativity,
and innovation the way we know
how to teach long division.
project-based learning—that allow
students to collaborate, work on
authentic problems, and engage with
the community. These approaches are
widely acclaimed and can be found in
any pedagogical methods textbook;
teachers know about them and believe
they’re effective. And yet, teachers don’t
use them. Recent data show that most
instructional time is composed of seatwork and whole-class instruction led by
the teacher (National Institute of Child
Health and Human Development Early
Child Care Research Network, 2005).
Even when class sizes are reduced,
teachers do not change their teaching
strategies or use these student-centered
methods (Shapson, Wright, Eason, &
Fitzgerald, 1980). Again, these are not
new issues. John Goodlad (1984)
reported the same finding in his landmark study published more than 20
years ago.
Why don’t teachers use the methods
that they believe are most effective?
ously engaging with content, classroom
management, and the ongoing monitoring of student progress knows how
intense and demanding this work is. It’s
a constant juggling act that involves
keeping many balls in the air.
Part of the 21st century skills movement’s plan is the call for greater collaboration among teachers. Indeed, this is
one of the plan’s greatest strengths; we
waste a valuable resource when we don’t
give teachers time to share their
expertise. But where will schools find
the release time for such collaboration?
Will they hire more teachers or increase
class size? How will they provide the
technology infrastructure that will
enable teachers to collaborate with more
than just the teacher down the hall?
Who will build and maintain and edit
the Web sites, wikis, and so forth? These
challenges raise thorny questions about
whether the design of today’s schools is
compatible with the goals of the 21st
century skills movement.