Illich, Beer, l’école et les défis des sociétés modernes

Le survol du carnet de James Farmer m’a fait découvrir un texte très intéressant de Oleg Liber, du Bolton Institute of Higher Education, en Angleterre. Le texte complet est disponible en format pdf, j’en retiens néanmoins quelques extrais:

This paper is dedicated to the memory of two leading thinkers of the second half of the twentieth century: Ivan Illich and Stafford Beer, both of whom died in 2002. Illich was concerned with the damaging effect of the structure of schooling on society and individuals, and Beer with the pathology of organisational structure in a rapidly changing environment. […] What is it that we wish to achieve through the education system? What are the unintended consequences? How can we improve the system? What is the best use of technologies? This paper discusses how the ideas of Illich and Beer can shed light on these questions, and provide tools to help with the transformation of the system to allow better pedagogy, and more appropriate organisational forms through the thoughtful application of technology. […]

For those concerned about the constraints of the formal education system, VLEs [Virtual Learning Environment] at first seemed to offer new possibilities for learning. They promised to lift the constraints of time and geography, allowing learners to have access from any location at times suited to them, but while still allowing them to part of a learning community in constant contact, and not isolated distance learners. They offered the possibility of realising a range of pedagogical models embracing active, open, collaborative and learner-centred learning; and indeed, conceptually VLEs have the potential to deliver on these promises. Unfortunately, the widespread adoption of VLEs by colleges and universities has seen the emergence of market leaders that while certainly providing for new models of access, do not promote pedagogical diversity, instead opting for an online version of the traditional delivery model. They do not provide learners with tools to organise themselves, they do not easily permit group learning, they do not easily support group or problem-based learning, and they do not easily integrate with the wider internet, instead creating a Œlearning ghetto’. […]

[…] The inertia of the elaborate edifice of the education system resists change, and it requires more than technology or new pedagogies to make change happen; it requires organisational redesign. For this we need to revisit the fundamental purposes of education, what we seek to achieve, and how best to do it. […] How might we invert our institutions so that they truly support the educational development of our population, achieving their wishes and ambitions while respecting their individual histories and interests? Do we want people who can engage in debate about current issues of concern, who are curious, creative and confident, who can identify what they want to learn and manage their own learning? Or are we happy for them just to know lots of facts, and have certificates that verify this? If it is the former, is the traditional school or university the best option we have to achieve this in the modern age? […]

We need to design a system that encourages the best use of the skills and knowledge of teachers and learners, and encourages collaboration between learners, between teachers, between institutions, and between education, work and culture; and we need to abandon the current competitive paradigm that drives wedges between people. […]