Search Results For learners mindset | 70 Results

Search Results For "learners mindset"

EdTech Tips

Dwayne Harapnuik — March 21, 2022

In the Applied Digital Learning (ADL) program students develop an innovation project that they work on throughout their time in the program. In contrast EdTech students only have 4 courses in the ADL. To help you with the adjustment to the ADL program and to deal with the authentic learning opportunity/project focus of the ADL we have put together the following resources specifically for EdTech students.

EdTech and Educational Leadership students will need an innovation project to work on for the 4 courses you are taking in the ADL program. The Leadership Project that is part of your practicum log can/should be used as the project in the ADL courses. It will add 20 hours to the overall Internship/Practicum Log so you need to pick a project/topic that fits under the Leadership umbrella and that you can then build on in each of the ADL courses. You have control over the choice of the project/topic and we encourage you to use the Choosing your Innovation Project section below to help you decide on what you can do. If you have spent any time at all in an instructional environment you can easily see many things that may need to be fixed. Focusing on fixing one of these problems is a good start for your innovation plan project. The ADL Why & Principles page provides the theoretical background for why authentic projects are so important for what we ask you to do in the program.

The ePortfolio (eP) is another very important component of ALL ADL courses. You will need an ePortfolio to complete all of the assignments in each of the courses. We suggest creating one with a simple tool such as Wix or WordPress. Both applications have lots of video help. You must include a blog page on your site, so Google Sites is not typically recommended because there is no built-in blog page. The Minimalist Fundamentals of ePortfolios section below will point you to the same resources that ADL students use to create ePortfolios.

Hopefully, the following information we have put together will give you a better idea of the how, the why, and the what you are heading into. In every course from the ADL program, there are facets that you will be able to include in the practicum report.

What to Expect from the ADL

The Applied Digital Learning (ADL) at Lamar University is designed with and uses constructivist principles that make it different from traditional programs. We believe that it is important to more than talk the constructivist talk and actually walk the constructivist walk have moved beyond the rhetoric by a creating significant learning environment (CSLE) in which we give learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (COVA).

To better understand the CSLE+COVA vs Traditional table comparisons in the video please take a few moments to review the full tables and explanations found at:

CSLE vs Traditional
COVA vs Traditional
CSLE+COVA Mindset vs Traditional

How the ADL is Different and What That Means to You

You will NOT find checklists, progress bars, completion status checks, competency or activity-focused rubrics, quizzes, and other related lower-order thinking or behaviorist tools or methods that will help you to check a completed activity off a list in the ADL program. The post Why I Don’t Use Checklists, Progress Bars & Other Activity Monitors will help you to understand and work through the constructivist and outcome-based education foundation that we use in the ADL.

Change in Focus

Shifting your focus from traditional information and content-focused instruction to using authentic learning opportunities, summed up as projects, will help you to make the adjustment to the ADL program. You can view Part B of this video series and explore additional resources that will help you with your Change in Focus.

Minimalist Fundamentals of ePortfolios:

I make the argument that ePortfolios can and should be simple to understand and, more importantly, simple to create and maintain. Especially if we keep the academic and scholarly jargon down to a minimum and focus on what we need to know and do to effectively use ePortfolios to enhance learning.
Dwayne’s Minimalist ePortfolio Fundamentals

Why Do You Need to Have an Innovation Project?

In EDLD 5315 you will be asked to create an action research plan to measure the impact of your innovation project. Being able to effectively measure the impact of a learning innovation project is a key responsibility of all educational technology leaders.

In EDLD 5317 you will be asked to create a podcast or long-form video and a publication about some aspect of your innovation project. As educational technology leaders, we need to be able to share how others can bring out an effective change in the learning environment. Being able to promote these enhancements to learning is an essential part of our professional responsibility.

In EDLD 5318 you will be asked to create an online or online blended course that will be related to your Innovation Project. If you consider the above example moving your Professional Learning online would be a great option that will benefit you and your learners.

In EDLD 5389 you will be asked to create a Professional Learning Plan/Strategy that will be based on your Innovation Project. Once again we encourage you to look to your organization and consider what needs to be improved or enhanced. The remote teaching that most people have resorted to because of the pandemic doesn’t work that well and you may want to look at how you can move from remote teaching to blended learning; this would be a great innovation project that will require considerable professional learning.

Choosing Your Innovation Project

Links to pages highlighted in the video:

Applied Digital Learning
ADL Why & Principles
ADL Program Map
ADL/EDLD 5305 Assignment Examples

Blended Learning Resource we use in the ADL:
Horn, M. B., & Staker, H. (2014). Blended: Using disruptive innovation to improve schools. John Wiley & Sons.

Course Design & Fink’s 3 Column Table

The online course you will be asked to create in EDLD 5318 will require the development of a course map that will take the form of Fink’s 3-Column Table. Consider the following video to help you develop the course map for the course you will be putting online. Even though I refer to EDLD 5313 where ADL students have the opportunity to develop their course maps this applies to the course map you will be asked to develop for EDLD 5318. Also note that the development of the course map was one of six activities students addressed in EDLD 5313 and this task can be accomplished in over a few hours. Once you are familiar with the process you can develop a course map for an existing course in very short order so this is a very useful tool to learn how to use.

4 Keys to aligning outcomes activities & assessment – There is an easy way and a difficult way to work through Fink’s taxonomy and the 3 column table – please take my advice and use this post and use the easy way.

Mapping Your Learner’s Journey – It is our responsibility to guide our learners through their personal development journey and help them take ownership of their learning.

Why Create Significant Learning Environments – Are you looking at the bigger picture or have you intellectually stepped far enough back to see the full learning environment?

Why you need a BHAG to design learning environments – Use a Big Hairy Audacious Goal (BHAG) to help define a visionary type goal that is more strategic and emotionally compelling rather than being simply tactical.

Why You Need to Rethink Your Role as an Educator – If you really don’t want to be replaced by an inspirational robot then you need to not only talk the talk of Dewey but walk the walk.

Difference Between “Doing Projects” and “Project-Based Learning” – Project-based learning is very powerful but we tend to limit its impact by focusing on just doing projects.

Revised August, 2024

PPL vs DPL

Dwayne Harapnuik — March 16, 2022 — Leave a comment

Listen to this Podcast on Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/episode/4sLDW4dnBo4kpPg1KaHxNt?si=6243d5830e284387

In LMD EP41, Personal Professional Learning vs Dependency Professional Learning Dr. Sue Bedard and I explore why we encourage a move from dependency professional learning (DPL) to personal professional learning (PPL). The move toward PPL is another more to fully igniting the Learner’s Mindset.

I have been exploring the benefits of self-directed or autodidactic learning for several decades and am continually excited to see the success stories of those who have taken full control of their learning.

The following links include a wide assortment of perspectives that can you used to either reinforce this notion of personal professional learning or to explore other aspects of learning that will augment this approach:

We Need More Autodidacts
The Shift from Engaging Students to Empowering Learners
Professional Learning Tips
Professional Learning
Professional Learning Plan
To Own Your Learning You MUST Use Higher-Order or Deeper Thinking
Applied Digital Learning
Applied Digital Learning Student Stories

One of the best ways to embrace personal professional learning is to continually seek out or emply authentic learning opportunities. Consider the following:

Authentic Learning Opportunities
Benefits of Life Long Authentic Learning Opportunities
Authentic Learning Leads to Authentic Adventures
Power of the Continual Practice of Authentic Learning
Why Authentic Learning Converts Into Lifelong Learning

In Learner's Mindset, Learning, Video - Wednesday Watchlist authentic learning, dependency, personal professional learning, PL, PPL, professional learning

To Own Your Learning You MUST Use Higher-Order or Deeper Thinking (Part 1)

Dwayne Harapnuik — December 5, 2021 — 3 Comments

One of the advantages of posting your ideas to your own journal, blog, or ePortfolio on an ongoing and long-term basis is that you can go back and evaluate and analyze your thinking and then continue to refine and synthesize your ideas. As new data or information comes to light or your research confirms or contradicts your hypothesis you can update your synthesis. The following is a synthesis from the post How to Change the World One Learner at a Time from January 2021 which is an update to a 2015 post Changing the world, one learner at a time as well as many other ideas that I have posted over the years. The higher-order thinking that I referred to in the Owning Your Learning Process video above is also a key function of the Learner’s Mindset which is achieved by a change in thinking about learning, a change in the approach to learning, and a change in the learning environment.

The change in thinking that I refer to requires a move away from lower-order thinking that dominates our society and results in the desire for a quick fix to all our challenges. I often refer to this quick-fix thinking in education because I spend most of my time in this discipline. For example, the educational technology (Edtech) literature for the past several decades is filled with examples of how the application of technology in a learning setting makes no significant difference and has little impact on learning outcomes and that the focus needs to be the learning, not the technology if we want to make a difference (Reich, 2020; Cuban, 2001; Russel, 1999; Wenglinsky, 1998). The research is clear. Edtech is not a quick fix or silver bullet (Thibodeaux, Harapnuik, Cummings, & Wooten, 2017) and the naive notion that one can implement it better than the last group that failed is continually repeated in all levels of classrooms across the nation (Harapnuik, 2021). This is why worksheets and fill-in-the-blank questions even when they are digitized in things like the SAMR model or other quick fixes do not result in deeper learning (Harapnuik, 2017).

When I originally explored why this reliance on lower-order thinking continually persists I naively assumed that we could simply move up to higher thinking to high-order thinking because it incorporates the lower levels and it also has the potential to offer so much more. Unfortunately, the move to higher-order thinking involves more than just the desire to operate at that level. Besides being much easier than higher-order or deeper thinking, lower-order thinking offers a sense of security because it is what our educational system has prepared most people to do. Standardized testing and the competency-based system of education that uses this form of summative assessment exist primarily in the realm of applying, understanding, and remembering which fall into the lower-order thinking in Bloom’s Taxonomy.

While we do have pockets of outcome-based instruction where students are given choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities or project-based learning, for the most part, our system relies on information transfer and competency-based instruction which resides in the realm of lower-ordered thinking which can be easily measured. The philosopher, Steven Hicks (2021) argues that our current education system is one that teaches compliance, and rather than learning that life is about solving problems our students are instructed that authorities have all the answers. We use the rhetoric of Dewey and say we want children to grow to be self-reliant, creative problem-solving adults but we have the reality of Thorndike that promotes the information transfer standardized model of education that can be easily measured and allows us to sort our students into the fixed norms of the industrial age (Labaee, 2005). I have listed several obstacles to higher-order thinking but I think the biggest challenge is that most people don’t really understand the difference between the two levels. Furthermore, many don’t realize that learners are seldom asked to move beyond showing they can remember information, can understand how information is used, and how that information is applied in a different yet similar situation.

Bloom’s Taxonomy
According to the revised Bloom’s taxonomy when people are attempting to carry out a procedure or implement a process or apply an existing model to a new but similar situation they are using lower-ordering thinking in their hopes of applying existing information to their situation (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). The category of Applying is at the top of the lower-order thinking within Bloom’s taxonomy but it is still considered lower-order thinking and only facilitates information transfer because there is no analysis, evaluation, or creation which are at the higher order and are essential to deeper learning. Drawing a diagram, making a chart, applying an existing process, and solving a formula are all lower-level skills that do not require higher-order thinking and this is typically as far as our education system goes.

I prefer to use the inverted Bloom’s taxonomy because it combines higher-order thinking into a continuum and reveals that analyzing, evaluating, and creating must be conducted in conjunction. The notion of using the information in a new but similar situation detailed in the Applying section seems to match the level of thinking that many students are comfortable with. But, don’t take my word for this. In the following 3 Learner’s Stories podcast Applied Digital Learning (ADL) students reflect on their learning journey and discuss what they have learned and what they would do differently if there were able to start the ADL program now. One of the most consistent laments is that ADL students wished they would have trusted the ADL process sooner and moved away from expecting to be told what to do and simply giving the instructors what they wanted.

COVA Podcast LM Stories EP08
View on Youtube – https://youtu.be/95PpBnkBAxk
Listen on Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/episode/5M5YnqRzG98l3nSHCCc5LY?si=33d092e4d0c04f9d

COVA Reflection LM Stories Ep 09
View on Youtube – https://youtu.be/t4PTGr1WjLI
Listen on Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/episode/2uumYGwgQkUSnsZc1dTYUu?si=61fdbf1a2bde4ecf

COVA Capstone LM Stories Ep 10
View on Youtube – https://youtu.be/ctaKftOOye8
Listen on Spotify – https://open.spotify.com/episode/39c65g9KB4H1DFL5eofico?si=e9c5fba740b84f97

This desire and comfort level of being told what to do and being given a checklist prescription of what is required to complete an assignment falls directly into the lower-order thinking that most of our learners are accustomed to. The original definition from Anderson, Krathwohl, and Bloom’s (2001) of Bloom’s taxonomy aligns with what I have seen with many students:

Applying: Carrying out or using a procedure through executing or implementing. Applying is related and refers to situations where learned material is used through products like models, presentation, interviews, and simulations.

Many just want to be told what procedure or model they need to execute or implement and believe that all they have to present an existing model to their colleagues or simulate the applied approach, and their innovation process is complete. To be fair to many of these students, this is what they know and simply what their administrators, schools, districts, or other organizations ask them to do. Applying an existing model, presenting a summary, and even creating a simulation or a model is the norm. This ongoing process of identifying a standard to be met, finding the approved or accepted procedure or process being used in the organization to meet this standard, and finally applying a standardized test or other information transfer confirmation tools to confirm that the standard has been met by the students is what most educators are engaged in on a daily basis. For rudimentary knowledge, simple situations, and information transfer this application process does work well and our education system has been relying on this model for over a century. As we move further into the digital information age we are realizing that our challenges are much more complex and require much more than doing what we have done in the past. To address these more significant challenges we need to move beyond applying existing information or processes in a new but similar fashion.

Moving to Higher Order Thinking
We need to move into analyzing, evaluating, and creating new solutions to ever-increasing challenges that we and our learners will face in the future. We also need to look beyond convenient summaries, quick fixes, or “Coles Notes” solutions and go back to primary sources to get the full picture. If we want to address the ever-increasing complexities of the challenges we face in the 21st Century then we must use higher-order thinking. We must continually investigate, explore, analyze and evaluate what we are doing as we begin creating innovations that will enhance learning. Anderson and Krathwohl’s (2001) explanation of the following three higher thinking levels offers the best starting point for our own analysis, evaluation, and creation of a novel way of integrating these ideas.

Analyzing: Breaking material or concepts into parts, determining how the parts relate or interrelate to one another or to an overall structure or purpose. Mental actions include differentiating, organizing, and attributing as well as being able to distinguish between components.

Evaluating: Making judgments based on criteria and standards through checking and critiquing.

Creating – Putting elements together to form a novel coherent whole or make an original product.

Analyzing, Evaluating, and Creating Leads to Deeper Learning and Learner’s Mindset
While the inverted Bloom’s taxonomy is useful for helping us to see the linear relationship between analyzing, evaluating, and creating and also see how higher-order thinking is separated from lower-order thinking, it doesn’t convey the interrelatedness between analyzing, evaluating, and creating. It also doesn’t show how the interrelation between analyzing, evaluating, and creating contributes to deeper learning.

The Venn diagram (Harapnuik, 2021) reveals how analyzing, evaluating, and creating come together and at that convergence point is where the learner engages in deeper learning and has then moved into the Learner’s Mindset.

This deeper learning and the adoption of a Learner’s Mindset is realized when you create a significant learning environment in which you give your learner choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning opportunities (CSLE+COVA). I have been applying this approach in all the learning environments that I have created and most recently have applied this to the DLL and ADL programs, the Provincial Instructor Diploma Program (PIDP), and all other aspects of my professional and personal life.

In my original post that I referenced at the beginning of this post, I made the grandiose goal of changing the world one learner at a time. A year later, I am still sharing this approach with as many people as I can. It is my hope that you too will begin the ongoing process of analysis, evaluation, and creation. Through a continual and iterative process of analysis of your learning environment, the new concepts, theories, and ideas you are exploring combined with your goal of bringing learning innovation to your organization, you too can begin to explore and evaluate how best to synthesize your findings and ideas into an innovation plan which will create the changes you desire and prepare your learners for life.

Please remember that this is only one part of a bigger picture and this synthesis will be continually evaluated and analyzed so explore the following and provide your feedback to help this ongoing process:

Applied Learning
Assessment Of/For/As Learning
Connecting the Dots Vs Collecting, the Dots
Change of Focus
CLSE
COVA
Feedforward
Learner’s Mindset

Continue to Part 2 – The challenges of owning your learning and higher-order thinking (Part 2)

References

Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Longman.

Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching and assessing: A Revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Abridge Edition). Addison.

Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: Computers in the classroom. Harvard University Press.

Harapnuik, D.K. (2021). Analyze-evaluate-create-deeper-learning-cropped.png. [Image] https://www.harapnuik.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/Analyze-Evaluate-Create-Deeper-Learning-cropped.png

Harapnuik, D.K. (2021). How to change the world, one learner, at a time. [Blog] Retrieved from https://www.harapnuik.org/?p=5555

Harapnuik, D.K. (2017). Reconsider the use of the SAMR model. [Blog]. Retrieved from https://www.harapnuik.org/?p=7235

Reich, J. (2020). Failure to disrupt: Why technology alone can’t transform education. Harvard University Press.

Labaree, D. F. (2005). Progressivism, schools and schools of education: An American romance. Paedagogica Historica, 41(1–2), 275–288. https://doi.org/10.1080/0030923042000335583

Russell, T. L. (1999). The no significant difference phenomenon: A comparative research annotated bibliography on technology for distance education: As reported in 355 research reports, summaries, and papers. North Carolina State University.

Thibodeaux, T. N., Harapnuik, D. K., Cummings, C. D., & Wooten, R. (2017). Learning all the time and everywhere: Moving beyond the hype of the mobile learning quick fix. In Keengwe, J. S. (Eds.). Handbook of research on mobile technology, constructivism, and meaningful learning. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Wenglinsky, H. (1998). Does it compute? The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. ETS Policy Information Center. https://www.ets.org/Media/Research/pdf/PICTECHNOLOG.pdf

In Learning COVA, CSLE, deeper learning, deeper thinking, higher-order, learners mindset

Applied Digital Learning Student Stories

Dwayne Harapnuik — November 29, 2021 — Leave a comment

In EDLD 5317 ADL students Pedro Beltran, Colby Clifford, Allison Palmer, and Brianna Rodriguez created a 3 Part Podcast series called Thoughts on Learning where they discuss the following key topics with Dwayne Harapnuik:

Part 1 – ePortfolios as Assessment as Learning EP 36
Explores how educators can move beyond using ePortfolios for assessments for learning to assessments as learning.

Listen on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/episode/10K5bhx13rhOzG3yI7h8lm?si=e7251b4517144482

Part 2 – Blended Learning and COVA EP 37
Explores how giving learners choice, ownership, and voice through authentic learning can have a positive impact on the blended learning environment.

Listen on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/episode/4iW07AwvV7aJdSU81KfsL2?si=1d67c46e20b5467b

Part 3 – Opportunities with ePortfolios Blended Learning and COVA EP 38
Summarizes the opportunities that learning environments that utilize ePortfolios, blended learning, and COVA can offer learners.

Listen on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/episode/0m1A1jBTl5fLqgnWszyKD0?si=ad2b9e8b103e45bc

You can also access the links to these ADL Student Discussions on the Learner’s Mindset Facebook Page – https://www.facebook.com/groups/1391607630957125

In Learning ADL, COVA, CSLE, eportfolio, learners mindset, Learning

Synthesis of Effective Organizational Change

Dwayne Harapnuik — September 29, 2021 — 2 Comments

I have been exploring how to bring about effective organizational change for many years. A quick search for the word “change” on my blog will reveal many posts. My analysis and evaluation started back in 2010, when I was still advocating for Kotter’s Eight-Stage Process of Creating Change but I was starting to see that there were some significant challenges to this process. By 2012 I was starting to explore broader ideas and looking for more of a synthesis to leading change as the post Recommended Readings on Leading Change In Education will reveal. I was recognizing that if you really wanted to bring about effective change you had to Practice Change by Living It and you had to acknowledge that The Head Won’t Go Where the Heart Hasn’t Been.

My synthesis of thinking about change started to come together after some significant failures in a few change strategies I had undertaken in 2011-2012. I had religiously used Kotter’s Eight-Stage process and I even focused on creating a sense of urgency but there was something missing. Without going to significant details on the situations my evaluation of what had happened and my analysis of what could be doing better revealed that there were many other factors that all had to come together. The following is an excerpt from a 2014 post I made in reaction to Seth Godin’s post – People Who Like This Stuff. This post is where the synthesis of effective organization change that is outlined in the Learner’s Mindset Discussion had its formation. Most of my thinking is still the same but in the last six years, I have added a Crucial Conversations component to the self-differentiated leader’s section because of the challenges everyone is facing today in trying to have conversations about even the smallest things.

One of the advantages of working through authentic projects is that they force one to continually evaluate what is working and what can be done better. If one hopes to change their own world and the world for their learners one must remain in the higher-order thinking of evaluation, analysis, synthesis, and creation which is also a key aspect of the Learner’s Mindset.

To see the full post you can go to People who like this stuff…like this stuff.

Why is change in education so slow and so difficult? I think Seth Godin offers one of the most simple and elegant explanations…

“People who like this stuff…like this stuff”

Godin goes onto explain that:

“…for those that are already in it, you can’t push too far, because they like the genre. That’s why they’re here.”

Those who have walked away probably aren’t just waiting around for you to fix it. Those who have never been, don’t think the genre has a problem they need solved.”

If we apply this elegant thinking to the challenges we face in improving education, then most educators who like this stuff [traditional learning environments}… like this stuff. Most people who don’t, have walked away as we can see by homeschooling, unschooling, and uncollege movements. Perhaps more importantly, for those (students, parents, and politicians) who have never been behind the scenes of our traditional educational system, there is no problem. Or the problems that they can see are simply ones that appeal to emotions like class size or special needs. These issues become hot buttons for political sound bites and the 6:00 news but sound research by people like John Hattie reveals that student achievement is not impacted significantly by class size but by many other factors that just aren’t as newsworthy.

How then do we get people who like this stuff (traditional education) to like new stuff (digital learning environments)? While innovating the learning environment has been a significant challenge for the past century (John Dewey was calling for a change to progressive education almost 100 years ago) it is possible and involves the following four steps.

1 Start with Why – In his popular TED talk Simon Sinek makes the argument that “people won’t buy what you do they buy why you do it”, so rather than telling traditional educators what they should or need to be doing to improve learning you need to provide a reason why they would want to add to or improve the current system. This has to be an emotional appeal. Sinek provides a fully developed argument for starting with why and how to use the Golden Circle in his book Start with Why: How Great Leaders Inspire Everyone to Take Action.

2. Identify and enlist key influencers – There are key social leaders within all organizations that have the influence to bring about the small activities that can start the behavioral change that leads to organizational change. Once you can identify one or two key activities and give these influencers the reason why they should be making these changes you can start the process of implementing digital learning to enhance the traditional learning environment. Once these influencers like the new stuff they will give others reason to like the new stuff as well. The book Influencer: The New Science of Leading Change, Second Edition provides an exceptional explanation of how to start behavioral change.

3. Install an effective execution strategy – You can’t change everything within an organization at once. You still have the whirlwind of the day-to-day activities that will consume 80-90% of your efforts. However, the key activities that your influencers are willing to change can become the one or two wildly important goals (WIG) that make up the foundation of The 4 Disciplines of Execution: Achieving Your Wildly Important Goals (4DX) change process that has proven to be an effective strategy in executing organizational change. Once one or two aspects of the traditional environment are changed you can then move on to the next one or two activities and so on. The key is to have an effective strategy and to execute.

4. Enlist and empower self-differentiated leaders – Edwin Friedman in the book A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix posits that having the conviction to keep on moving forward when everyone in your organization is screaming for the status quo is a key ability of the self-differentiated leader. These people do not need validation from the group but are able to see beyond the challenges to the broader goals of serving learners in new and productive ways. These people practice change by living it and have the ability to lead by example and can show people why they like the “new stuff” and why liking the new stuff is better for our learners and for our society as a whole.

This is not an easy process but we owe it to our children and to the young men and women who are going to our universities and colleges with dreams of building a better world.