In December of 2015, Mark Zuckerberg collaborated with his wife, Dr. Priscilla Chan, to form a new organization called the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Through this, they have garnered $99.1 million in funds for a program called Summit Learning. It is a three-year-old platform that encourages self-taught learning by providing personalized, adaptable curriculums to each individual student, and the teachers act as “guides.” With students spending increased amounts of time on devices, the program has run into numerous problems. Kansas students and their parents recently began protesting Summit Learning. It was implemented poorly without enough previous research and has imposed various repercussions on these guinea pig towns. There are crucial questions to be asked about what this new type of program means for students as well as teachers.
It’s important to grasp a better understanding of what exactly Summit Learning is and how it’s being used. Predominantly reigning in Kansas, public schools opted in, as they presumed Summit would lead to a more personalized learning experience for their students and that it would help “even the playing field,” especially for underfunded schools. Those were the intentions, but it didn’t play out exactly as intended.
Under Summit, students spend more time on laptops than they may have previously—the program is typically free, but the laptops oftentimes have to be bought separately. That’s already a red flag—if this software is to be used in lower-income areas, affording a laptop may be difficult for some families. Nonetheless, students’ days are spent taking online quizzes and completing lesson plans at their own pace. The teachers are there to assist and hold mentoring sessions to act as a “guiding hand.”
Shortly after, students started coming home with headaches and cramps. The full impact of technology has not been researched thoroughly enough for one to know the entire implications of using it for hours on end, every day. Chances are, we’ll figure out the ramifications once the damage is already done. It’s necessary that we utilize technology carefully. Rushing into it, i.e. Summit Learning, is foolish because when organizations wish to facilitate major alterations to an educational system, it must be done well.
As technology continues to advance, it leaves the future role of teachers to be questioned. Will the vast majority of present teachers simply morph into the guidance position, or will they be forced to adapt to online courses? Students will lack interpersonal relationships amongst their teachers and peers as well. School is a social outlet for numerous students and is oftentimes where connections and networks are formed. Teaching solely online is creating an assembly-line process for students.
There must be a balance—something Summit lacks. The implementation of technology into school systems has to be done gradually and intuitively. There is a better mechanism available. Let’s focus on language classes for the moment. Some may be familiar and/or have used online textbooks that also have lesson plans, quizzes and assignments built in. Similar to Summit, it practices self-directed learning but functions better.
For instance, pulling from a commonly used online textbook company, Vista Higher Learning, DU set it up where students are assigned homework Monday through Thursday. Each day it estimates the time required to complete the work, which never exceeds an hour and a half. The program enables students to save and return to their work later, and it is sectioned off so students can take breaks and finish at their own pace. More importantly, after students complete Monday’s homework, Tuesday they will go to their language class for approximately an hour and the professor will cover the materials in last night’s homework, provide clarification and do practice activities. In this setting, students are capable of working at their own pace and they still experience interpersonal communication with the professor and peers.
Zuckerberg and Chan took a big step forward in the realm of education, yet they stumbled. If technology is to be effectively integrated in education then the future looks like one where schools still exist but their function is more discussion based where students and teachers can flesh out what they’re learning and converse with one another in addition to working with technology.
