Does Mass Customized Learning help all students?

Speakout

Posted

In 2017, the Brookings School District began a pilot program at Medary Elementary called Mass Customized Learning (MCL). According to the district, MCL is a standards-based curriculum where students work to master each standard within each content area. It is self paced, and the district states students will not move forward until each individual standard is met.

On its face, there doesn’t seem to be much to disagree with regarding personalization as a method to deliver education. It promises to engage students, using discovery and hands-on inquiry, placing them in control. Teachers “facilitate” learning, rather than provide direct instruction. Students have “voice and choice.”  

MCL seems to be cutting edge in the world of education.

As an educator and researcher, I look for sound statistical evidence to support adoption of these type of approaches. In reviewing and preparing for an upcoming study of personalized learning, which includes MCL, I have found scant evidence to support the effectiveness of customized approaches. 

A 2018 report of federally funded “innovative education” programs found that only 12 of the 67 funded had any positive impact on student achievement. In contrast, there is a deep library of research supporting the effectiveness of direct, explicit instruction, and its role in student educational achievement, especially for students with learning challenges. This is in comparison to results found for discovery-based (customized) learning approaches.

In 2018-19, the district expanded the MCL pilot to Dakota Prairie and Hillcrest Elementary, as well as Camelot Intermediate. The district website states Mickelson Middle School will provide MCL starting in 2019-20.

With the pilot being expanded during a time when independent research and evidence of effectiveness are lacking, a concern is raised. 

Community members recall the recent opt-out put forward by this superintendent and board where they attempted to increase taxes in the amount of $50 million over a period of 10 years. This was soundly defeated, and at the time, the superintendent and board returned to the drawing board with a firm message to spend our tax dollars wisely.

As a community, we must ask our superintendent, principals and school board critical questions about expending tax dollars on this educational innovation. Is MCL appropriate, effective and needed? What evidence exists to support its effectiveness? How are the needs of students with learning challenges being met when research supports they respond best to explicit instruction? Or, is the answer this... MCL is just one more educational innovation we’ve adopted without having done our homework about whether or not it really helps all students learn.