component to the Web’s hyper-linked documents -- meaning. XML documents not
only contain information, but also the knowledge of how to act on that information.
In such an environment it becomes possible for these XML documents to possess
behavior unique to individual users. This is a very interesting development in
software engineering -- XML is a meta language, a language for defining languages.
The purpose is not only to standardize software, but to establish a platform on
which to build in the meaning of data.
Documents are the artifacts of education systems. The issue is how can our
documents can be used and reused in a more efficient and effective manner. Users
will be able to view and edit documents without concern for where or how they
were originally created. When documents contain both information and behavior it
becomes possible for each user to be presented with an individualized, customizeed
version of the same document. The Semantic Web
represents an unplanned
addition to pedagogy. I don’t know how to predict what will happen in a meta-data
revolution, but I can’t wait to find out.
Because it will be possible for many different kinds of devices to access
information networks, our current focus on “THE” computer technology will wane.
When using these new technologies, user’s questions will change from “What do I
do?” to “What do I want?” It will no longer be necessary to focus on teaching
When transmission of information is not dependent on push technologies,
when it is also possible to build semantic documents, it becomes possible to think
about individualized learning environments. I believe it is possible for educators to
get into position to think about how information networks will change curriculum
One dimension of these changes will shift C&I from broadcast learning (push)
to interactive learning (pull). This affects the role of teachers in classrooms and their
teaching styles. Lecture, textbooks, homework assignments, and schools are all
analogies for broadcast, centralized C&I methods. The emphasis is predefined
structure that will work best for mass audiences. Curricula designed to meet the
needs of a grade; one size fits all. This describes the authoritarian, top-down, teacher-
centered approaches of many schools. At its heart, this is a utilitarian approach that
when correctly executed should bring the greatest benefit to the greatest numbers of
If it is possible, shouldn’t educators consider or at least plan for other
approaches that can better meet American goals of universal education? One option
is student centered, customized learning ... just enough, just in time powered by
The pull technology of interactive learning means that pedagogy can be
relieved of the necessity of being optimized for the transmission of information
(push) and left to concentrate on building learning environments. This centers the
learning experience on individuals rather than on the transmitter. One consequence
will be the changing role of teachers -- from transmitter to facilitator. This is
especially true in postsecondary education, where the specific interests and
background of the teacher strongly influence the content; and where much activity
of the classroom involves the teacher speaking and the student listening. It will be
important for universities to give consideration to teaching styles that can
accommodate advances in information networks.
Another consequence will be changing the role of curriculum development.
The explosion of information happening in our “information age” makes it
increasingly difficult to determine what is important to know. William Doll’s (1993)
model of curriculum development called the Four Rs provides a way to include
change into the process of developing curricula.
Doll suggesting that curriculum is not a thing -- not a predigested package of
information waiting to be delivered. It is not sufficient for curricula to describe the
universe. Curricula should be thought of as a verb, as in traveling the course.
Curriculum design is not disconnected units or even connected units, rather it is a
series of opportunities for students and teachers to engage in reflection and in
constructing meaning. Doll refers to this aspect of curriculum design as recursion,
one of his Four Rs. This matches well with my life experiences as a learner described
above in how I think about learning.
Curriculum creators must constantly question their actions and the results of
their actions. This is another of Doll’s Four Rs, rigor. This is being aware of the
assumptions and the fact that these assumptions contain values that influence the
process. This is not just a step in the process, it is a recognition that curriculum itself
be an ecological system. It is not enough for a curriculum to recognize a changing
university, the design of the curriculum itself must encompass change (Doll, 1995).
This is a model of curriculum development that can get us beyond the
greatest benefit to the greatest numbers of people. It is a necessity to recognize that
diversity and differentiation are commonplace, not exceptional.
This is how to get into position to think about customized learning.
