“In order to reap the full dividend of technology in schools we need a vision for learning that is about empowering students to learn for themselves, not to facilitate the delivery of curriculum. This is the paradigm shift required if schools are truly to harness the potential of personalized learning.”

I very much agree with that first sentence but I have to wonder if our reliance on technology is itself a curriculum. If learning is personalized should it not go beyond technology and also utilize “real life” experiences? Are all attempts at education an attempt to divert “personalized leaning” towards herd mentality? When we teach with the purpose of realizing a “dividend” does the “personalized” aspect of learning relate to the teacher or the student? Who gets the dividend? Are we conditioned to expect everything to have a dividend? Is that why we teach?

There is only one way to truly teach and that is by example.

And that is also how we learn. And that is why we teach.

Dividends from students are not why we teach. We teach to learn.

To harness the potential of personalized learning we must be an example of that and show that learning transcends all modalities, including technology. We must be an example of how EVERYTHING can be a learning experience.

Any reliance on technology or any other crutch is a failure of example. Modalities should not be confused with outcomes. And outcomes should not be confused with intentions. All we can do is provide an example and then learn from our students.

Just my whacko perspective.