Swift Kick Central

Increased Engagement Through Bizarre College Clubs

Yesterday, USA Today reported on how student participation in co-curricular (outside the classroom) activities leads to higher GPAs and a more satisfied social life. 

"College experts say students who participate in extracurricular activities are more engaged in the college experience, and benefits can be seen both in and outside the classroom."

The article's focus wasn't about participation in standard clubs such as German and Chess, but rather in more obscure clubs such as Michigan's Squirrel Club or Harvard's College Cube Club. In other words, the long tail of student interests.

But ask any student activities department how they would feel about a 50% increase in registered campus clubs and you'd experience a face of joyous panic.

Supporting the long tail means the position of student activities also has to shift from gate keeper to facilitator. Instead of registering, formalizing, and monitoring every organization, support a platform that allows students to self-organize around an infinite number of interests and act as the facilitator to introduce like minded students together. 

"Seth have you met Randy, you both like White Water Canoeing" 

Allowing bizarre peer-to-peer learning communities to form through the long tail will not only increase engagement, but also will lead to longer lasting friendships because the commonality of "we're the only ones who love XYZ" is already established. As John Gardner, president of the John N. Gardner Institute for Excellence in Undergraduate Education said in the USA Today article:

"Friendship formation is task No. 1 for most students. If you don't make friends, you're lonely, you're anxious, you feel sort of adrift."

New tools are supporting schools as they shift towards a more decentralized peer-to-peer engagement model.

Through the schools using our Red Rover campus directory tool, we can actually visualize, and for the first time quantify, what the long tail of engagement looks like. 

The Illustrated Guide to a Ph.D

Related to Malcolm Gladwell's "10,000 hours to become an expert" rule, Matt Might is helping the visual learners of the world with his Illustrated Guide to a Ph.D.

--------------------

Imagine a circle that contains all of human knowledge:

 

By the time you finish elementary school, you know a little:

 

By the time you finish high school, you know a bit more:

 

With a bachelor's degree, you gain a specialty:

 

A master's degree deepens that specialty:

 

Reading research papers takes you to the edge of human knowledge:

 

Once you're at the boundary, you focus:

You push at the boundary for a few years:

 

Until one day, the boundary gives way:

 

And, that dent you've made is called a Ph.D.:

 

Of course, the world looks different to you now:

 

So, don't forget the bigger picture:

Keep pushing.

--------------------

What Matt points out, that Malcolm misses, is that once you've become an expert you now have to bare the 'curse of knowledge.' Ph.Ds may expand the sphere of human knowledge, but in doing so, might loose the ability to communicate what they know to everyone else because they can't imagine not knowing what they know. The trick then is to balance the hyper focus on one topic with the world at large. One counter exercise is to continually engage people unrelated to your area of expertise.

In education, the gap between faculty, student affairs, staff, and administration is a well known problem. As each department becomes more engrained in their expertise, it becomes even harder to relate to each other, even though institutional cross collaboration is vital to a student's success. If you are currently working in higher ed, when's the last time you expanded out from your department to see the forest and not just the trees?

Education Reform: The Polarizing Debate

The rebel valedictorian graduation speech generated 500 comments and over 160K views. Some people wrote one liners while others wrote dissertations that are bookmarked for a rainy day. What became distinctly clear was how polarizing the comments were. People either applauded Erica for her courage to stand up to a broken system...

While others took the opportunity to criticize Erica for being self indulgent, juvenile, and grammatically incorrect...

And then there were the head scratchers...

It's amazing how one post can generate such a debate with no clear winner or loser. A lot has to do with the topic...education. If you thought everyone had an opinion about health care reform, wait till we start education reform. 

Education, like health care, has an amazing ability to trigger heated debates. I think it stems from the fact that we all have a first hand experience in both and thus feel we have a right to our seemingly correct judgement.

"I went to public school and I'm a successful doctor now. Everything is fine."

"I flunked out my senior year because school was horrible."

"I home schooled my kids and they rank in the 99% percentile on tests! Home Education is the answer."

The problem is that many of our judgements come from an individual, or anecdotal, experience, not from education research. A study of one isn't a study, it's an opinion. First hand experience doesn't automatically qualify someone as an expert. Just look at the Autism vs Vaccination debate for evidence of such. We have a right to our opinion but let's not claim it as THE way to reform education. 

In the end, one comment tried to suspended judgement of Erica's critic of the education system that most of us can agree with...

The New Mexico State Fight Song: The Long History Of Drinking & College

Aggies, Oh Aggies

The hills send back the cry

We're here to do or die

Aggies, Oh Aggies

We'll win this game or know the reason why

And when we win this game

We'll buy a keg of booze

And drink it to the Aggies

Till we wobble in our shoes

A-G-G-I-E-S!

Aggies, Aggies, Go Aggies

Aggies, Oh Aggies

The hills send back the cry

We're here to do or die

Aggies, Oh Aggies

We'll win this game or know the reason why!

Their fight song is based on a popular turn of the century song titled "Oh Didn't He Ramble." The lyrics referencing drinking continue to be controversial, but as of yet, remain part of the song. With the recent uproar about Target marketing beer pong as essential college gear, maybe we have to first look back on our own traditions and see what needs some updating.

Valedictorian Speaks Out Against Schooling in Graduation Speech

Author Note: Over the past four days, this post has received 110K+ hits and over 300+ comments. If you are interested in the education reform conversation, please follow us via RSS, Email, or Twitter.

Last month, Erica Goldson graduated as valedictorian of Coxsackie-Athens High School. Instead of using her graduation speech to celebrate the triumph of her victory, the school, and the teachers that made it happen, she channeled her inner Ivan Illich and de-constructed the logic of a valedictorian and the whole educational system.

Erica originally posted her full speech on Sign of the Times, and without need for editing or cutting, here's the speech in its entirety:

Here I stand 

There is a story of a young, but earnest Zen student who approached his teacher, and asked the Master, "If I work very hard and diligently, how long will it take for me to find Zen? The Master thought about this, then replied, "Ten years . ." The student then said, "But what if I work very, very hard and really apply myself to learn fast -- How long then?" Replied the Master, "Well, twenty years." "But, if I really, really work at it, how long then?" asked the student. "Thirty years," replied the Master. "But, I do not understand," said the disappointed student. "At each time that I say I will work harder, you say it will take me longer. Why do you say that?" Replied the Master, "When you have one eye on the goal, you only have one eye on the path." 

This is the dilemma I've faced within the American education system. We are so focused on a goal, whether it be passing a test, or graduating as first in the class. However, in this way, we do not really learn. We do whatever it takes to achieve our original objective. 

Some of you may be thinking, "Well, if you pass a test, or become valedictorian, didn't you learn something? Well, yes, you learned something, but not all that you could have. Perhaps, you only learned how to memorize names, places, and dates to later on forget in order to clear your mind for the next test. School is not all that it can be. Right now, it is a place for most people to determine that their goal is to get out as soon as possible. 

I am now accomplishing that goal. I am graduating. I should look at this as a positive experience, especially being at the top of my class. However, in retrospect, I cannot say that I am any more intelligent than my peers. I can attest that I am only the best at doing what I am told and working the system. Yet, here I stand, and I am supposed to be proud that I have completed this period of indoctrination. I will leave in the fall to go on to the next phase expected of me, in order to receive a paper document that certifies that I am capable of work. But I contest that I am a human being, a thinker, an adventurer - not a worker. A worker is someone who is trapped within repetition - a slave of the system set up before him. But now, I have successfully shown that I was the best slave. I did what I was told to the extreme. While others sat in class and doodled to later become great artists, I sat in class to take notes and become a great test-taker. While others would come to class without their homework done because they were reading about an interest of theirs, I never missed an assignment. While others were creating music and writing lyrics, I decided to do extra credit, even though I never needed it. So, I wonder, why did I even want this position? Sure, I earned it, but what will come of it? When I leave educational institutionalism, will I be successful or forever lost? I have no clue about what I want to do with my life; I have no interests because I saw every subject of study as work, and I excelled at every subject just for the purpose of excelling, not learning. And quite frankly, now I'm scared. 

John Taylor Gatto, a retired school teacher and activist critical of compulsory schooling, asserts, "We could encourage the best qualities of youthfulness - curiosity, adventure, resilience, the capacity for surprising insight simply by being more flexible about time, texts, and tests, by introducing kids into truly competent adults, and by giving each student what autonomy he or she needs in order to take a risk every now and then. But we don't do that." Between these cinderblock walls, we are all expected to be the same. We are trained to ace every standardized test, and those who deviate and see light through a different lens are worthless to the scheme of public education, and therefore viewed with contempt. 

H. L. Mencken wrote in The American Mercury for April 1924 that the aim of public education is not "to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence. ... Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim ... is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States." 

To illustrate this idea, doesn't it perturb you to learn about the idea of "critical thinking." Is there really such a thing as "uncritically thinking?" To think is to process information in order to form an opinion. But if we are not critical when processing this information, are we really thinking? Or are we mindlessly accepting other opinions as truth? 

This was happening to me, and if it wasn't for the rare occurrence of an avant-garde tenth grade English teacher, Donna Bryan, who allowed me to open my mind and ask questions before accepting textbook doctrine, I would have been doomed. I am now enlightened, but my mind still feels disabled. I must retrain myself and constantly remember how insane this ostensibly sane place really is. 

And now here I am in a world guided by fear, a world suppressing the uniqueness that lies inside each of us, a world where we can either acquiesce to the inhuman nonsense of corporatism and materialism or insist on change. We are not enlivened by an educational system that clandestinely sets us up for jobs that could be automated, for work that need not be done, for enslavement without fervency for meaningful achievement. We have no choices in life when money is our motivational force. Our motivational force ought to be passion, but this is lost from the moment we step into a system that trains us, rather than inspires us. 

We are more than robotic bookshelves, conditioned to blurt out facts we were taught in school. We are all very special, every human on this planet is so special, so aren't we all deserving of something better, of using our minds for innovation, rather than memorization, for creativity, rather than futile activity, for rumination rather than stagnation? We are not here to get a degree, to then get a job, so we can consume industry-approved placation after placation. There is more, and more still. 

The saddest part is that the majority of students don't have the opportunity to reflect as I did. The majority of students are put through the same brainwashing techniques in order to create a complacent labor force working in the interests of large corporations and secretive government, and worst of all, they are completely unaware of it. I will never be able to turn back these 18 years. I can't run away to another country with an education system meant to enlighten rather than condition. This part of my life is over, and I want to make sure that no other child will have his or her potential suppressed by powers meant to exploit and control. We are human beings. We are thinkers, dreamers, explorers, artists, writers, engineers. We are anything we want to be - but only if we have an educational system that supports us rather than holds us down. A tree can grow, but only if its roots are given a healthy foundation. 

For those of you out there that must continue to sit in desks and yield to the authoritarian ideologies of instructors, do not be disheartened. You still have the opportunity to stand up, ask questions, be critical, and create your own perspective. Demand a setting that will provide you with intellectual capabilities that allow you to expand your mind instead of directing it. Demand that you be interested in class. Demand that the excuse, "You have to learn this for the test" is not good enough for you. Education is an excellent tool, if used properly, but focus more on learning rather than getting good grades. 

For those of you that work within the system that I am condemning, I do not mean to insult; I intend to motivate. You have the power to change the incompetencies of this system. I know that you did not become a teacher or administrator to see your students bored. You cannot accept the authority of the governing bodies that tell you what to teach, how to teach it, and that you will be punished if you do not comply. Our potential is at stake. 

For those of you that are now leaving this establishment, I say, do not forget what went on in these classrooms. Do not abandon those that come after you. We are the new future and we are not going to let tradition stand. We will break down the walls of corruption to let a garden of knowledge grow throughout America. Once educated properly, we will have the power to do anything, and best of all, we will only use that power for good, for we will be cultivated and wise. We will not accept anything at face value. We will ask questions, and we will demand truth. 

So, here I stand. I am not standing here as valedictorian by myself. I was molded by my environment, by all of my peers who are sitting here watching me. I couldn't have accomplished this without all of you. It was all of you who truly made me the person I am today. It was all of you who were my competition, yet my backbone. In that way, we are all valedictorians. 

I am now supposed to say farewell to this institution, those who maintain it, and those who stand with me and behind me, but I hope this farewell is more of a "see you later" when we are all working together to rear a pedagogic movement. But first, let's go get those pieces of paper that tell us that we're smart enough to do so!

Update 8/7/10 - It was only a matter of time until a Youtube video of Erica's speech emerged. I'll warn you now, her delivery isn't as well put together as her speech. 

Affinity Housing: The Importance of Roommate Matching

College of Coastal Georgia recently transitioned to a four-year residential institution. Among the many changes, the campus will soon include residence halls and a director of residence life. Dave Leenhouts, director of CCGA's student life, heads the committee to hire their director of residence life.

In a conversation with Dave over the weekend, he talked about how the big buzz word on the committee is affinity housing. In other words, pre-matching roommates ahead of time based on similar traits to ensure higher retention rates.

The impact of first year roommates on an individual is huge and can have lasting life time effects from grades, to weight, to drinking habits. The NY Times recently posted an article on the science of roommates.

First-year roommates matter. Though they may go their separate ways sophomore year, their reach can ripple throughout the college years and after.

The researchers aren't entirely clear on why one student has such an impact over another in their first year, but it sounds like a hybrid of the proximity effect of the Framingham Heart Study and the emotional gap felt by first year students.

CCGA is currently using Red Rover as their campus directory to socially connect first year students to similar students and campus clubs. Dave wants to go further and use the directory to roommate students based on similar interests, activities, and background.

An affinity housing dashboard is already within the scope of Red Rover. And because so much of Red Rover is data driven it will be interesting to study the results of matching roommates who are 100% identical verses those who are intellectually, socially, spiritually, etc opposites as a way to promote diversity.

The Historical Roots (& Future Role) of Informal Learning In Education [Quote]

"Despite appearances, the humble pizza-and-study group isn't some minor activity, it's the kernel of the university. When knowledge was scarce, universities grew as communities of scholars clustered around the latest information technology: rare, expensive, handwritten books. The first Western university, the University of Bologna, was found in 1099 by people who wanted to study Byzantine-era Justinina legal code. The very word 'universitas' doesn't mean campus, or class, or a particular body of knowledge; it refers originally to the guild, the group of people united in scholarship. The word "college" too comes from the Latin 'collegium,' related to "colleague." meaning "community," "society, "guild"." Now that knowledge is a free, abundant commodity, the communities that form around it are just as important to education as they ever were."

"We took the role of a teacher and tried to fragment it so students would play teachers to each other. The best person to teach you something is someone who's just mastered it." - George Siemens, teacher of "Connectivism and Connective Knowledge" which opened its classroom to 24 registered University of Manitoba students and 2,200 unregistered students from around the world.

Source: Kamenetz, Anya, and Anya Kamenetz. DIY U. Chelsea Green Publishing Company, 2010. 88. Print.

Sir Ken Robinson: Masterful Messenger for the Education Revolution [VIDEO]

Sir Ken Robinson is a valuable asset to the education revolution community. Not because he's trumpeting new ideas, in fact many of his ideas have been around a long time, but it's in the way he delivers the message. He makes the revolution real, human, personal, and funny. Here's his latest TED Talk from February 2010:

Guiding Principles - Part 3

The following is the third part of our assumptions pulled from our "Guiding
Principles" Wikipage.

Here is Part 1 and Part 2

---

Assumptions Part 3:

These are broad based and not as set as principles. It's useful to list assumptions, just to be clear on the thought behind the system. Some of these are more controversial than others. Some were controversial when we started and are not anymore. Some we believe whole heartedly. With others we just needed to pick a side.

On Research

1. Research and "truth" are great. Trying things is an important first step towards both. We are on that first step.
2. Entrepreneurs can't do research and market at the same time. We like research and researchers and hope to work with lots of them. Ethics will require transparency, that's a good thing.

On Academia vs. Business

1. We would like to build a bridge over the "vs." see research above.
2. On average, businesses should be more honest and transparent.
3. On average, academia should be more flexible and experimental.

On Changing the Education System

1. We're not setting out to revolutionize anything. We are doing things that seem smart that are now possible. It's incremental change that's now obvious to us.
2. We might be wrong. That's cool. Luckily we'll only be losing our own money.
3. This isn't foreign policy, if we are wrong, our mistake won't hurt anyone.
4. "If you aren't prepared to be wrong, you'll never do anything original." -Sir Ken Robinson
5. Pedagogy is great, it's just not our focus with Red Rover. There is pedagogy built in to the tool. This list is part of that process, but again, it's not our focus.
6. Very few people do things for the "right" reasons. Most people do it because everyone else is.
7. Most people don't know or care why Facebook or iPhones work or how they change industries. They use them because they work well and everyone else does. We have to figure out the why and how for Red Rover and know that most people will never care.
8. Tools that people use but don't understand can change the world. This can be dangerous. We hope we're not dangerous.
9. We don't know as much history with education reform as we should. We will catch up on our reading as soon as we are done building this thing. In the meantime, we really appreciate summaries and reading lists.

Guiding Principles - Part 2

The following is the second part of our assumptions pulled from our "Guiding Principles" Wikipage.

Here is Part 1

---

Assumptions Part 2:

These are broad based and not as set as principles. It's useful to list assumptions, just to be clear on the thought behind the system. Some of these are more controversial than others. Some were controversial when we started and are not anymore. Some we believe whole heartedly. With others we just needed to pick a side.

On Interface / Web 2.0

1. Tags are the way to organize things when the things change all the time. (They are flexible, adaptable, surprising, and folksonomy is fun to say.)
2. "Works well" is pretty.
3. "Good design is clear thinking made visible." -Tufte
4. Bottom -> up organization releases some of the incredible power stored at the edges. This is great for students. It's also good for shrinking school budgets.
5. Top-> down organization is old school. Loosen up. If your school is erring on the "we tried it" side, that's a good sign. Buy insurance and leash your lawyers.

On Education

1. Digital portfolios will become the new grades. Short hand points systems will develop (probably relying on a fair amount of peer feedback, see above, think eBay) where the professor is just one of many inputs.
2. These systems will be transparent and real time, giving learning a video game interface. (Think character development in a role playing game.)
3. Aggregated digital portfolios with tags on time lines will result in automated, personalized recommendations. Sophomores like you liked these classes. Click here to sign up. Click here to see the collaborative notes from years past. Click here to see a list of available mentors who match your life vector.
4. Aggregated digital portfolios will exist outside of the control of the school systems.
5. Students will use free software to see what school is currently the best match for their interests. (Think shopping for books on Amazon.) The enrollment process will dramatically change because of this automated matching.
6. Every student is at a different place. Each +1 has a different x starting place, different maturity, and different vector of relevance. Personalized customization will be the norm and expectation all the time.
7. Engagement is paramount. Relevancy (when defined by right info, right schema, right time, right packaging/ delivery) is 40% of engagement. The other 60% is emotional attachment to community.

On Orientation

1. Everyone wants an introduction. Preferably to people who are like them. Especially when entering anything new where we don't know anyone yet.
2. Common interests are a great place to start relationships. Embracing diversity comes later. It is bad to force too much diversity too fast or let people stay in their comfort zone. This balance will be different for each student.
3. The process outlined above will be visualized with the social graph. It too, will look like a video game.
4. Relationships get better in the real world. Online is a good place to introduce and warm things up.
5. Orientations should not be only online.
6. Orientation should use online components to make the real world aspect better.

Stay tuned for Part 3.