How can the music industry inform the system of K-12 education? | John Hardin


As we think about how do we transform education
in a way that is going to enable every kid to realize their full potential I think there’s
actually a lot that we can learn from the music industry. If you’re in the early twentieth century
and there’s a song that you want to hear your best bet is to turn on the radio and
listen to the radio and hope that your song comes on. Now you have some choice in the different
stations but for the most part there’s not a lot of optionality there and you’re just
hoping your song comes because music was bundled together in this sort of singular distribution
system. That changed in the 1940s because RCA created
something called the 45. And you could now buy a 45 and get the song
that you wanted to hear on the A side. The B side was probably not a very good song
but you could get what you wanted to hear on the A side because music was now being
unbundled. They were taking this structure and pulling
apart into its individual parts. But then the record companies began to really
focus on producing LPs or long playing albums. So again they’re bundling music together. You can still get the song you want but you’re
probably going to get 12 or 15 other songs. The compact disc industry is built on that. And then along come mp3s and music is unbundled
again. Now you can get the specific song that you
want to hear. And then music service providers come along
and they bundle music together in new and different ways so that you can get the song
you want and it’s also probably going to be paired with other songs that you would
really like and enjoy. So what in the world does that have to do
with education? Well, as you look across our society you can
see how innovation and progress whether it’s in music or news or television or even work. These changes take place in this cycle of
bundling and unbundling. And yet that hasn’t happened in education. In the late nineteenth century we basically
bundled education together in this singular distribution system that we all know as sort
of school and going to school and that’s the way we learn. So the challenge for us now is how do we encourage,
how do we equip educators to unbundle it. To rebundle it in different ways. To take new approaches so that education isn’t
just something that you’re doing in the classroom. It may not happen in the classroom. It could happen anywhere. That’s the thing. It’s like this whole sort of wild, wild
west of opportunities. What we’re doing is we are reforming on
the edges of a system that was really introduced in the late nineteenth century that remains
very sort of producer top down oriented as opposed to very individual kid personalized
oriented. And so what we’re doing is inviting people
to consider that question. What would it take? What does it look like for us to begin with
the kids themselves. So I think it’s interesting to look at this
on sort of the backdrop of an important transition that happened in the twentieth century in
America. If you step into the twentieth century in
1900 in the United States you are stepping into a producer oriented society. And what I mean by that is that the producers
were creating the goods, the services in the institutions based primarily on their preferences. So you take the Ford automotive company. Henry Ford is attributed with saying you can
have any color Model T you want as long as it’s black. Or if you wanted a Coca Cola it comes in one
size and it comes in one flavor. So there wasn’t a lot of meaningful choice
available. But what if you wanted a red Model T or you
wanted a sports car or you wanted a truck or you wanted a big Coke or a tiny Coke or
you want a Coke Zero or a Diet Coke or a Cherry Coke. Those options are now available because we
had this transition in the twentieth century from a producer orientation more to an individual
or personalized orientation. And that’s a big deal because what that
does for all of us is it opens up all of these opportunities for us to find greater fulfillment. Because now you can get what best fits you,
not what best fits Henry Ford or whomever it was that produced it. And you see that across the twentieth century
across the United States in many different sectors of society. Where you don’t really see it is in education. Education today remains a producer oriented
institution. We take kids who are all phenomenally different
in their interests, their aptitudes, their skills and we press them into a uniform system
that is not personalized toward them but is more producer focused, producer oriented. And what’s the result? Well Gallup did a study and found that 25
percent of fifth graders are disinterested in education. By the time students are in twelfth grade
they found two-thirds of them are disinterested in education. And you can’t really blame them because
education is not being personalized to them. It’s not relevant to them. They don’t see the connection. They don’t see how it’s valuable. What does this mean for me? And so at Stay Together what we’re doing
is we’re working to bring folks together around this question of how is it that we
can bring about that transition in education. That transition that we’ve seen across our
society where we are going to focus more on the kid who is standing in front of that teacher,
sitting in front of that teacher instead of the formula or the system that’s being pressed
down by the producer.

28 thoughts on “How can the music industry inform the system of K-12 education? | John Hardin”

  1. I am not convinced that this unbundled education concept will yield better results. Where is the data. No don't give me a Gallop sruvey of kids. Give me actual controlled studies with real outcomes. In addition without more details, this just sounds like the modularized programs we saw in the 90s. Mind now I'm not saying this idea is wrong, I just don't hear what II need.

  2. Education is not a commodity. the market fails in this sphere. It fails to distribute it to those who need it most. Substantial PUBLIC FUNDING and the destruction of the School district funding model is the solution. Trust the experts/educators to innovate and try new models that aren't designed off a factory model.

  3. Oh, changing education is like expanding options through marketing? Man, yours is just 1 basic idea. How will you expand this to expanding individual gifts? How will you address those in classes? How will you notice them? And make the system and teachers ready for it? How to help students become solutionaries in a climate threatened world? How will you help them rise up against the old system, rather than impose another top down trick on them with its own flaws? How will you impact the system so that your idea mixes with thousands of other great ideas, that also need to be heard and implemented? Etc. This is a beginners talk, start educating yourself. πŸ˜‰

  4. πŸ“žπŸ™„ Suicide Hot Lien?
    πŸ“žπŸ‘©β€πŸ¦° If it's not wet it's regreat

    πŸ€―πŸ”«Good bye cruel world!
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rF1qNco9eGc

  5. Yes, a stereo typical ego syntric model. Sounds like the Ego syntric California Mellinial Model. How about addressing things with proven causal relationships first that we've ignored for 40 years? Like maybe the relative age effect? No? Too hard? Well, I'm not any more interested in this model of snake oil than the others. Address something you can measure to see if what you're doing has an effect. Not this, lets feed narcissism, and see if that beaks everything, and if it doesnt claim victory because no one can prove you wrong.

  6. Education is a sausage factory and is a destroyer of human potential. Changing it is possible but will require people who understand the value of human potential with a desire to see the potential of the individual full filled. Knowing while doing so benefits society and mankind as a whole. It is possible and not as difficult as one may think.

  7. Won't come from the top down. Has to be demanded by the parents, and by the culture. Even then, good luck getting this past the teacher unions.

    It occurs to me you've just described home schooling.

  8. The music industry could also teach our kids how to take ownership of someone else's creative output, and pay the creator pennies on the dollar for it. That would be great, wouldn't it?

  9. Government back schooling that can't fail or stop being funded no matter how crappy the schools get, gets you as crappy schools as government is willing to tolerate.

    Remove the government from schooling and allow entrepreneurs to compete. Let the crappy schools fail and good schools prosper. Even Coca Cola made products that failed, but this is why you don't see them any more:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGUb1GkfquU

  10. Random answer, probably flawed. What if in earlier years of development we encourage the growth of a child’s curiosity. Then follow up with an education system that pushes kids to learn via the things they are interested in.we let them as individuals choose topics and within those topics teachers have set criteria for which they focus on as the kids work their way through understanding the topic, of course there has to be some form of general studies to give the kids a benchmark for learning skills. An example from a kid would be: years 1&2 would focus on generating and focusing their interests and the following years will be all about the different aspects of topics like, learning math through Timmy’s interest in being an astronaut, and then he watches a documentary on the Amazons and from that he learns about biology, and so on. All while hitting the minimum requirements of education on general studies. This would require smaller class sizes and better teachers,and presumably giving more value to the learning experience to the kids.

  11. Music is everything
    πŸ–€Β  🎢  πŸ–€Β  🎢  πŸ–€
    Β Β Β  🎡 𝕃𝕠𝕧𝕖 𝕀π•₯ 🎡
    πŸ–€Β  🎢  πŸ–€Β  🎢  πŸ–€

  12. The internet and You Tube has helped me curate the education I need, much more than any institution of learning could have.

  13. This entire premise is delusional. The music industry can teach children how to get away with criminal activity. That's about it.

  14. You FAILED to mention how mp3s have destroyed musical culture. Sure, you get what you want but you also make a race to the bottom of cheap tricks in an industry where every song now has to be a guaranteed hit. Every song released these days uses:
    1. obvious auto tune
    2. Arse shaking videos made using prostitutes
    3. A lack of musical opinions, ideas and experimentation (handful of successful composers who are paid well to say Miley Cyrus wrote her own songs).
    That's the last thing our CHILDREN need.
    As a musician and a teacher I find your ideas wanting proper conclusive thought and study.
    Our culture in the West has been gutted because of the behavior of the music industry, an industry that abandoned it's moral obligation some 10 years ago.

  15. What on earth is wrong with having a select range of choices in education? A balance must be struck. The restricted choice argument can be summed up in the failure of the Middle School concept, it failed in the US, CANADA, UK and now after 15 years in my home state it's failed here too. Too much choice breeds confusion and most shockingly a lack of identity for a demographic of people who crave but do not receive such from their mobile phone struck parents.

  16. So allow for an individual approach to education in which the students and teachers agree on subjects and rate of information transfer? Homeschooling?

  17. Consumer choice in music: the downside there is possibly missing out on hearing something that's beyond my comfort zone, musically or culturally. This happens all the time with music, but also with stuff like social media content, literature, news, politics. America, at any rate, is becoming increasingly tribal.

    Increasing consumer choice in education increases the risk of letting that tribalism bleed into the way our kids grow up and learn. I'm not saying it definitely would happen β€” parents' attitudes about the world tend to shift, often in directions of diversity and tolerance, when they are taking into consideration that they're arbiters and ambassadors for their kids preferences, as their guardians. In our real communities, we almost always act better than the Platonic shadows of our online selves would suggest.

    But, that's why I think centralized production of education has had such staying power: communities want their children to learn the entire comprehensive package of "truth" and want to be inclusive of however much of society is accepted by the zeitgeist of their time.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *