What Educators Get Wrong About 21st Century Learning
Punya Mishra, Rohit Mehta, Michigan State University, United States
Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, in Savannah, GA, United States ISBN 978-1-939797-13-1 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA
The question “What knowledge is of most worth?” is one that deserves being revisited and revised periodically. This is of particular significance today, given the influence of digital technologies on learning. Kereluik et al. (2013) offered a synthesis of multiple expert frameworks and perspectives on what is important about learning in the 21st century. This research study builds on the Kereluik study by conducting a survey of educators to see how practitioners’ perspective matches that of the experts. More specifically we investigate how educators value and rank the 9 forms of knowledge (under 3 broad categories, foundational, humanistic, and meta) laid out by Kereluik et al. Our analysis indicates that our survey participants rated core and cross-disciplinary knowledge to be among the least important while highly ranking the categories within meta knowledge. These results are consistent with some popular views on how we should think about learning in the 21st century.
Mishra, P. & Mehta, R. (2016). What Educators Get Wrong About 21st Century Learning. In G. Chamblee & L. Langub (Eds.), Proceedings of Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference (pp. 2968-2975). Savannah, GA, United States: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE).
© 2016 Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE)