ARTICLE 1 OF 3
On the business development side of simCEO, we have had a few meeting with potential partners who are intrigued by simCEO and want to learn more. It’s been a learning curve for us. We thought we’d get out in front of the curve and try to outline some the challenges we foresee - and why we’re looking for partners who share our belief that these problems can be overcome.
In earlier posts, we shared elements of simCEO that make it a valuable (and much-needed) way for students to learn in the 21st Century.
1) Students who move beyond recall and produce solutions with content.
2) Social Learning: Learning from and with one another.
3) Contextual Learning: Authentic roles & goals
The list above represents a change to what students experience in schools. But like any change, it does not come easily. These are challenges we have to overcome; we want to be up front with those challenges.
Do we have tested solutions to overcome all of these challenges? No. But we believe deeply they can be solved, and they need to be solved.
We are looking for partners who can help us overcome these challenges. We call the next 3 posts the:
List of reasons you shouldn’t partner with us.
Reason #1 Is this model of learning what we want for students?: We’re asking students to apply their knowledge in an open-ended simulation without right and wrong answers. So, simCEO is closer to Minecraft than a typical (business) simulations which assess learning with pre-programmed, multiple-choice questions or finite questions such as “How many widgets would you like to produce this quarter?” with associated points for correct answers. This is not a plug-n-play simulation with right/wrong answers (although we believe there are avenues to add some of these elements). At it’s core, simCEO is an open-ended platform that allows students to create and apply their own solutions - and evaluate each others’ solutions - in a dynamic environment. Learning, as demonstrated through the application of content knowledge in an authentic, dynamic environment, is not judged by a computer algorithm. Instead it is judged by the collective feedback of peers ( other students and the instructor) within the specific context of the simulation as shown through share prices. If students do not share responses that are deemed as quality by their peers, they are encouraged to adjust, and re-adjust, to improve their ideas.
- Is this the type of learning that schools are seeking? Will educators and school districts deem it worthy of their time and money?
- Can we create effective social learning environments - where students learn from one another instead of just a teacher or a pre-programmed computer algorithm?
- Is this a viable model of learning capable of large scale implementation in schools?
These are legitimate barriers. This is an attempt to alter the staus quo. We seek partners who can embrace this model of learning and can help advance it within schools.