What We Educators Get Wrong About 21st-Century Learning

Results of a Survey

Punyashloke Mishra, Rohit Mehta

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

11 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Twenty-first-century learning and how it differs from prior conceptions of learning have received significant attention lately. Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe, and Terry (2013) offered a synthesis of multiple expert frameworks and perspectives on 21st-century learning, summarizing them in nine forms of knowledge (under three broad categories: foundational, humanistic, and meta). Using this framework, in this study, 518 practicing educators completed a survey on their beliefs about 21st-century learning, allowing us to compare practitioners' perspectives to that of the experts. Our analyses indicate that, in contrast to the expert view as Kereluik et al. synthesized, which equally valued all the categories, survey participants ranked creativity, collaboration, communication, and critical thinking (meta-knowledge) and digital/information and communication technology (ICT) literacy (one component of foundational knowledge) as being most important. Life/job skills, ethical/emotional awareness, and cultural competence (humanistic knowledge) were ranked lower, while disciplinary and cross-disciplinary knowledge (two components of foundational knowledge) were regarded as being least important. Though these results are consistent with some popular views about 21st-century learning, we argue that this reduced emphasis on foundational and humanistic knowledge is misguided. It is, we suggest, the consequence of an unreflective emphasis on the power of technology to access information and a fundamental misunderstanding of the very nature of learning and the broader goals and purposes of education. Finally, we highlight three myths about learning in the 21st century and offer recommendations to address these myths.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)6-19
Number of pages14
JournalJournal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education
Volume33
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2 2017

Fingerprint

educator
Communication
learning
Education
expert
myth
twenty-first century
knowledge
creativity
communication technology
information technology
literacy
communication
education

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education
  • Computer Science Applications

Cite this

What We Educators Get Wrong About 21st-Century Learning : Results of a Survey. / Mishra, Punyashloke; Mehta, Rohit.

In: Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, Vol. 33, No. 1, 02.01.2017, p. 6-19.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{d1135e4640684a429a51f4709b5d673e,
title = "What We Educators Get Wrong About 21st-Century Learning: Results of a Survey",
abstract = "Twenty-first-century learning and how it differs from prior conceptions of learning have received significant attention lately. Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe, and Terry (2013) offered a synthesis of multiple expert frameworks and perspectives on 21st-century learning, summarizing them in nine forms of knowledge (under three broad categories: foundational, humanistic, and meta). Using this framework, in this study, 518 practicing educators completed a survey on their beliefs about 21st-century learning, allowing us to compare practitioners' perspectives to that of the experts. Our analyses indicate that, in contrast to the expert view as Kereluik et al. synthesized, which equally valued all the categories, survey participants ranked creativity, collaboration, communication, and critical thinking (meta-knowledge) and digital/information and communication technology (ICT) literacy (one component of foundational knowledge) as being most important. Life/job skills, ethical/emotional awareness, and cultural competence (humanistic knowledge) were ranked lower, while disciplinary and cross-disciplinary knowledge (two components of foundational knowledge) were regarded as being least important. Though these results are consistent with some popular views about 21st-century learning, we argue that this reduced emphasis on foundational and humanistic knowledge is misguided. It is, we suggest, the consequence of an unreflective emphasis on the power of technology to access information and a fundamental misunderstanding of the very nature of learning and the broader goals and purposes of education. Finally, we highlight three myths about learning in the 21st century and offer recommendations to address these myths.",
author = "Punyashloke Mishra and Rohit Mehta",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "2",
doi = "10.1080/21532974.2016.1242392",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "33",
pages = "6--19",
journal = "Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education",
issn = "2153-2974",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - What We Educators Get Wrong About 21st-Century Learning

T2 - Results of a Survey

AU - Mishra, Punyashloke

AU - Mehta, Rohit

PY - 2017/1/2

Y1 - 2017/1/2

N2 - Twenty-first-century learning and how it differs from prior conceptions of learning have received significant attention lately. Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe, and Terry (2013) offered a synthesis of multiple expert frameworks and perspectives on 21st-century learning, summarizing them in nine forms of knowledge (under three broad categories: foundational, humanistic, and meta). Using this framework, in this study, 518 practicing educators completed a survey on their beliefs about 21st-century learning, allowing us to compare practitioners' perspectives to that of the experts. Our analyses indicate that, in contrast to the expert view as Kereluik et al. synthesized, which equally valued all the categories, survey participants ranked creativity, collaboration, communication, and critical thinking (meta-knowledge) and digital/information and communication technology (ICT) literacy (one component of foundational knowledge) as being most important. Life/job skills, ethical/emotional awareness, and cultural competence (humanistic knowledge) were ranked lower, while disciplinary and cross-disciplinary knowledge (two components of foundational knowledge) were regarded as being least important. Though these results are consistent with some popular views about 21st-century learning, we argue that this reduced emphasis on foundational and humanistic knowledge is misguided. It is, we suggest, the consequence of an unreflective emphasis on the power of technology to access information and a fundamental misunderstanding of the very nature of learning and the broader goals and purposes of education. Finally, we highlight three myths about learning in the 21st century and offer recommendations to address these myths.

AB - Twenty-first-century learning and how it differs from prior conceptions of learning have received significant attention lately. Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe, and Terry (2013) offered a synthesis of multiple expert frameworks and perspectives on 21st-century learning, summarizing them in nine forms of knowledge (under three broad categories: foundational, humanistic, and meta). Using this framework, in this study, 518 practicing educators completed a survey on their beliefs about 21st-century learning, allowing us to compare practitioners' perspectives to that of the experts. Our analyses indicate that, in contrast to the expert view as Kereluik et al. synthesized, which equally valued all the categories, survey participants ranked creativity, collaboration, communication, and critical thinking (meta-knowledge) and digital/information and communication technology (ICT) literacy (one component of foundational knowledge) as being most important. Life/job skills, ethical/emotional awareness, and cultural competence (humanistic knowledge) were ranked lower, while disciplinary and cross-disciplinary knowledge (two components of foundational knowledge) were regarded as being least important. Though these results are consistent with some popular views about 21st-century learning, we argue that this reduced emphasis on foundational and humanistic knowledge is misguided. It is, we suggest, the consequence of an unreflective emphasis on the power of technology to access information and a fundamental misunderstanding of the very nature of learning and the broader goals and purposes of education. Finally, we highlight three myths about learning in the 21st century and offer recommendations to address these myths.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85025597946&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85025597946&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/21532974.2016.1242392

DO - 10.1080/21532974.2016.1242392

M3 - Article

VL - 33

SP - 6

EP - 19

JO - Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education

JF - Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education

SN - 2153-2974

IS - 1

ER -