I'm here today to talk about the two ideas that, at least based on my observations at Khan Academy, are kind of the core, or the key leverage points for learning. And it's the idea of mastery and the idea of mindset.
Ovde sam da vam govorim o dve ideje, bar u vezi sa mojim zapažanjem na akademiji Kan, koje su nekako u srži, ili su ključne odskočne daske za učenje. A to je ideja o savladavanju znanja i ideja o mentalnom sklopu.
I saw this in the early days working with my cousins. A lot of them were having trouble with math at first, because they had all of these gaps accumulated in their learning. And because of that, at some point they got to an algebra class and they might have been a little bit shaky on some of the pre-algebra, and because of that, they thought they didn't have the math gene. Or they'd get to a calculus class, and they'd be a little bit shaky on the algebra. I saw it in the early days when I was uploading some of those videos on YouTube, and I realized that people who were not my cousins were watching.
Bio sam svedok ovome ranije, dok sam radio s rođacima. Mnogi od njih su u početku zapinjali iz matematike jer su im se sve te rupe nagomilale tokom učenja. I zbog toga, kad su u jednom momentu stigli na časove algebre a možda su imali malčice klimavo predznanje iz algebre, te su zbog toga smatrali da nemaju dara za matematiku. Ili bi stigli do časova proračuna, a znanje iz algebre im je bilo malčice klimavo. To sam viđao ranije kad sam postavljao neke od tih snimaka na Jutjub, i tad sam shvatio da ljudi koji mi nisu u rodu gledaju te snimke.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
And at first, those comments were just simple thank-yous. I thought that was a pretty big deal. I don't know how much time you all spend on YouTube. Most of the comments are not "Thank you."
I u početku su komentari prosto bili zahvalnice. Smatrao sam da je to prilično važno. Ne znam koliko svi vi provodite vremena na Jutjubu. Većina komentara nisu zahvalnice.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
They're a little edgier than that. But then the comments got a little more intense, student after student saying that they had grown up not liking math. It was getting difficult as they got into more advanced math topics. By the time they got to algebra, they had so many gaps in their knowledge they couldn't engage with it. They thought they didn't have the math gene. But when they were a bit older, they took a little agency and decided to engage. They found resources like Khan Academy and they were able to fill in those gaps and master those concepts, and that reinforced their mindset that it wasn't fixed; that they actually were capable of learning mathematics.
Malčice su stroži od toga. No onda su komentari postali nešto žešći, đak za đakom je govorio da je odrastao mrzeći matematiku. Iskomplikovalo se kad su stigle naprednije teme iz matematike. Dok bi stigli do algebre, imali su toliko rupa u svom znanju da nisu mogli njome da se bave. Smatrali su da nemaju dara za matematiku. No kad su malo odrasli, malo su se potrudili i odlučili da se angažuju. Otkrili su izvore, poput Akademije Kan i bili su u stanju da popune te rupe i da savladaju koncepte, a to je ojačalo njihov mentalni sklop da ne bude fiksiran; da su oni zapravo u stanju da nauče matematiku.
And in a lot of ways, this is how you would master a lot of things in life. It's the way you would learn a martial art. In a martial art, you would practice the white belt skills as long as necessary, and only when you've mastered it you would move on to become a yellow belt. It's the way you learn a musical instrument: you practice the basic piece over and over again, and only when you've mastered it, you go on to the more advanced one.
A svakako da je ovo način na koji biste savladali mnogo toga u životu. Na taj način biste naučili borilačke veštine. Kod borilačkih veština, prvo vežbate veštine za beli pojas, koliko god je potrebno, i tek kad to savladate prešli biste na žuti pojas. Na taj način savladavate muzički instrument: vežbate osnovni komad iznova i iznova, i tek kad ga savladate, prelazite na složeniji.
But what we point out -- this is not the way a traditional academic model is structured, the type of academic model that most of us grew up in. In a traditional academic model, we group students together, usually by age, and around middle school, by age and perceived ability, and we shepherd them all together at the same pace. And what typically happens, let's say we're in a middle school pre-algebra class, and the current unit is on exponents, the teacher will give a lecture on exponents, then we'll go home, do some homework. The next morning, we'll review the homework, then another lecture, homework, lecture, homework. That will continue for about two or three weeks, and then we get a test. On that test, maybe I get a 75 percent, maybe you get a 90 percent, maybe you get a 95 percent. And even though the test identified gaps in our knowledge, I didn't know 25 percent of the material. Even the A student, what was the five percent they didn't know?
Međutim, ističemo - da tradicionalni akademski model nije ovako struktuiran, tip akademskog modela uz koji je većina nas odrasla. U tradicionalnom modelu, grupišemo đake zajedno, obično prema uzrastu, i kasnije u osnovnoj školi prema uzrastu i sposobnostima i sve ih zajedno vodimo istovremeno. A obično se dešava, recimo u osnovnoj školi na pripremnom času za algebru i trenutna oblast je stepenovanje, nastavnik će da održi predavanje o stepenovanju, potom odlazimo kući, radimo domaći. Ujutru ćemo da pregledamo domaći, potom novo predavanje, domaći, predavanje, domaći. To traje otprilike dve do tri nedelje, a onda sledi kontrolni. Na tom kontrolnom ću možda da rešim 75% zadataka, možda ćete vi da rešite 90%, možda 95 procenata. I iako je kontrolni otkrio rupe u našem znanju, ja nisam znao 25% date oblasti. Čak i kod odličnog đaka, šta je pet procenata koje nije znao?
Even though we've identified the gaps, the whole class will then move on to the next subject, probably a more advanced subject that's going to build on those gaps. It might be logarithms or negative exponents. And that process continues, and you immediately start to realize how strange this is. I didn't know 25 percent of the more foundational thing, and now I'm being pushed to the more advanced thing. And this will continue for months, years, all the way until at some point, I might be in an algebra class or trigonometry class and I hit a wall. And it's not because algebra is fundamentally difficult or because the student isn't bright. It's because I'm seeing an equation and they're dealing with exponents and that 30 percent that I didn't know is showing up. And then I start to disengage.
Čak iako smo otkrili rupe, čitavo odeljenje tada prelazi na sledeću oblast, verovatno napredniju oblast koja će se nasloniti na te rupe. Možda će to da budu logaritmi ili negativno stepenovanje. I taj proces se nastavlja, a vi odmah počinjete da uviđate kako je to čudno. Ne znam 25 procenata najtemeljnije oblasti, a sada su me odgurnuli na napredniju oblast. A to će da se nastavi mesecima, godinama, sve do određene tačke, kad ću možda da budem na času algebre ili trigonometrije i zapadnem u škripac. I to ne zato što je algebra u suštini komplikovana ili zato što đak nije bistar. Već zato što ugledam jednačinu koja ima veze sa stepenovanjem i tih 30 procenata koje ne znam izlazi na videlo. I ja počinjem da odustajem.
To appreciate how absurd that is, imagine if we did other things in our life that way. Say, home-building.
Kako bismo shvatili apsurdnost ovoga, zamislite kad bismo druge stvari u životu radili tako. Recimo građenje kuća.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
So we bring in the contractor and say, "We were told we have two weeks to build a foundation. Do what you can."
Dakle, unajmimo izvođača radova i kažemo: "Rečeno nam je da imamo dve nedelje da završimo temelje. Uradite koliko možete."
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
So they do what they can. Maybe it rains. Maybe some of the supplies don't show up. And two weeks later, the inspector comes, looks around, says, "OK, the concrete is still wet right over there, that part's not quite up to code ... I'll give it an 80 percent."
I oni urade koliko mogu. Možda pada kiša. Možda ne stignu neke zalihe. I dve nedelj kasnije dođe inspektor, pogleda okolo i kaže: "U redu, beton je i dalje vlažan tamo, ovaj deo nije baš po standardu... Oceniću to kao 80%."
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
You say, "Great! That's a C. Let's build the first floor."
Vi kažete: "Sjajno! To je trojka. Sagradimo prvi sprat."
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
Same thing. We have two weeks, do what you can, inspector shows up, it's a 75 percent. Great, that's a D-plus. Second floor, third floor, and all of a sudden, while you're building the third floor, the whole structure collapses. And if your reaction is the reaction you typically have in education, or that a lot of folks have, you might say, maybe we had a bad contractor, or maybe we needed better inspection or more frequent inspection. But what was really broken was the process. We were artificially constraining how long we had to something, pretty much ensuring a variable outcome, and we took the trouble of inspecting and identifying those gaps, but then we built right on top of it.
Ista stvar. Imamo dve nedelje, uradite koliko možete, pojavi se inspektor, oceni sa 75%. Sjajno, to je dva plus. Drugi sprat, treći sprat, i iznenada, dok gradite treći sprat, čitava građevina se uruši. A ako je vaša reakcija ona koju tipično imate u obrazovanju ili koju većina ljudi ima, možda ćete reći, možda smo imali lošeg izvođača ili nam je trebala bolja inspekcija ili češća inspekcija. Međutim, sami proces je zapravo pokvaren. Veštački smo ograničavali vreme potrebno da nešto obavimo, prilično obezbeđujući varijabilan rezultat i mučili smo se da pregledamo i prepoznamo rupe, ali smo gradili upravo preko njih.
So the idea of mastery learning is to do the exact opposite. Instead of artificially constraining, fixing when and how long you work on something, pretty much ensuring that variable outcome, the A, B, C, D, F -- do it the other way around. What's variable is when and how long a student actually has to work on something, and what's fixed is that they actually master the material.
Stoga je ideja o savlađivanju znanja da se radi upravo obrnuto. Umesto veštačkog ograničavanja, fiksiranja kada i koliko dugo radite na nečemu, prilično obezbeđujući taj varijabilni rezultat: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, - uradite obrnuto. Varijabilno je kada i koliko dugo će đak zaista da radi na nečemu, a fiksirano je istinsko savlađivanje gradiva.
And it's important to realize that not only will this make the student learn their exponents better, but it'll reinforce the right mindset muscles. It makes them realize that if you got 20 percent wrong on something, it doesn't mean that you have a C branded in your DNA somehow. It means that you should just keep working on it. You should have grit; you should have perseverance; you should take agency over your learning.
A važno je uvideti da neće đaci samo bolje savladati stepenovanje, već će to učvrstiti mišiće odgovarajućeg mentalnog sklopa. Shvatiće da ako imaju 20 procenata grešaka iz nečega, to ne znači da im je trojka urezana negde u njihovom DNK. To znači da bi trebalo da nastave da rade na tome. Da bi trebalo da imaju rešenost; da imaju istrajnost; trebalo bi da ovladate svojim učenjem.
Now, a lot of skeptics might say, well, hey, this is all great, philosophically, this whole idea of mastery-based learning and its connection to mindset, students taking agency over their learning. It makes a lot of sense, but it seems impractical. To actually do it, every student would be on their own track. It would have to be personalized, you'd have to have private tutors and worksheets for every student. And these aren't new ideas -- there were experiments in Winnetka, Illinois, 100 years ago, where they did mastery-based learning and saw great results, but they said it wouldn't scale because it was logistically difficult. The teacher had to give different worksheets to every student, give on-demand assessments.
Sad, mnogi skeptici bi rekli, pa dobro, sve je to sjajno, filozofski, čitava ta ideja o učenju zasnovanom na znanju i njegovoj vezi s mentalitetom, o đacima koji ovladavaju svojim učenjem, ima mnogo smisla, ali se čini nepraktičnom. Kako biste to zapravo postigli, svaki đak mora da ide svojim tempom. Moralo bi da bude personalizovano, morali biste da imate privatne asistente i plan rada za svakog đaka. A to nisu nove ideje - imali smo eksperimente u Vinetki, Ilinoisu, pre 100 godina, gde su podučavali savlađivanje znanja i bili su uspešni, ali je rečeno da je logistički teško to preneti na veće razmere. Nastavnik bi morao da daje različit plan rada svakom đaku, da daje zadatke na zahtev.
But now today, it's no longer impractical. We have the tools to do it. Students see an explanation at their own time and pace? There's on-demand video for that. They need practice? They need feedback? There's adaptive exercises readily available for students.
Ali danas to više nije nepraktično. Imamo oruđa za to. Đaci da vide objašnjenje kad i gde im odgovara? Imamo snimke na zahtev za to. Treba im vežba? Potrebni su im komentari? Imamo prilagodljive vežbe, lako dostupne đacima.
And when that happens, all sorts of neat things happen. One, the students can actually master the concepts, but they're also building their growth mindset, they're building grit, perseverance, they're taking agency over their learning. And all sorts of beautiful things can start to happen in the actual classroom. Instead of it being focused on the lecture, students can interact with each other. They can get deeper mastery over the material. They can go into simulations, Socratic dialogue.
A kad se to desi, štošta krasno se dešava. Pod jedan: đaci zapravo mogu da savladaju koncepte, ali grade i mentalni sklop usmeren ka rastu, grade rešenost, istrajnost, ovladavaju svojim učenjem. I razne lepe stvari mogu da otpočnu u stvarnoj učionici. Umesto da budu fokusirani na predavanje, đaci mogu da se druže. Mogu da dublje savladaju gradivo. Mogu da prave simulacije, vode sokratovski dijalog.
To appreciate what we're talking about and the tragedy of lost potential here, I'd like to give a little bit of a thought experiment. If we were to go 400 years into the past to Western Europe, which even then, was one of the more literate parts of the planet, you would see that about 15 percent of the population knew how to read. And I suspect that if you asked someone who did know how to read, say a member of the clergy, "What percentage of the population do you think is even capable of reading?" They might say, "Well, with a great education system, maybe 20 or 30 percent." But if you fast forward to today, we know that that prediction would have been wildly pessimistic, that pretty close to 100 percent of the population is capable of reading. But if I were to ask you a similar question: "What percentage of the population do you think is capable of truly mastering calculus, or understanding organic chemistry, or being able to contribute to cancer research?" A lot of you might say, "Well, with a great education system, maybe 20, 30 percent."
Kako bismo shvatili ono o čemu govorim i tragediju izgubljenog potencijala, želeo bih da vam dam nekakav misaoni eksperiment. Ako bismo otišli 400 godina u prošlost, u Zapadnu Evropu, koja je čak i tad bila jedan od pismenijih delova planete, videli biste da je oko 15 procenata populacije znalo da čita. I pretpostavljam da ako biste nekoga pismenog upitali, recimo člana sveštenstva: "Koji procenat populacije smatrate da je uopšte sposoban da nauči čitanje?" Možda bi rekli: "Pa, uz sjajan obrazovni sistem, možda 20 ili 30 procenata." Ali ako premotate do danas, znamo da bi ta pretpostavka bila krajnje pesimistična, da je skoro 100 procenata populacije pismeno. Ali kad bih vam postavio slično pitanje: "Koliko procenata populacije smatrate da je sposobno da zaista savlada proračun ili razume organsku hemiju ili je u stanju da doprinese istraživanju raka?" Mnogi od vas bi rekli: "Pa, uz sjajan obrazovni sistem, možda 20, 30 procenata."
But what if that estimate is just based on your own experience in a non-mastery framework, your own experience with yourself or observing your peers, where you're being pushed at this set pace through classes, accumulating all these gaps? Even when you got that 95 percent, what was that five percent you missed? And it keeps accumulating -- you get to an advanced class, all of a sudden you hit a wall and say, "I'm not meant to be a cancer researcher; not meant to be a physicist; not meant to be a mathematician." I suspect that that actually is the case, but if you were allowed to be operating in a mastery framework, if you were allowed to really take agency over your learning, and when you get something wrong, embrace it -- view that failure as a moment of learning -- that number, the percent that could really master calculus or understand organic chemistry, is actually a lot closer to 100 percent.
Ali šta ako je ta procena prosto zasnovana na sopstvenom iskustvu bez okvira savlađivanja znanja, na sopstvenom ličnom iskustvu ili posmatranju vršanjaka, gde su vas gurali kroz razrede ovim uspostavljenim ritmom, gomilajući sve te rupe? Čak i kad ste imali 95% uspešnosti, šta je to 5% što vam je promaklo? A to nastavlja da se gomila - stignete do višeg razreda, iznenada ste u škripcu i kažete: "Nije mi suđeno da istražujem rak; nije mi suđeno da budem fizičar ili da budem matematičar." Pretpostavljam da zapravo jeste tako, ali kad bi vam bilo omogućeno da radite pod okvirom savlađivanja znanja, kad bi vam bilo omogućeno da ovladate vašim učenjem, i kad pogrešite u nečemu, prigrlite to - posmatrate taj neuspeh kao tren za učenje - taj broj, procenat koji može da zaista savlada proračun ili razume organsku hemiju je zapravo daleko bliži 100 procenata.
And this isn't even just a "nice to have." I think it's a social imperative. We're exiting what you could call the industrial age and we're going into this information revolution. And it's clear that some things are happening. In the industrial age, society was a pyramid. At the base of the pyramid, you needed human labor. In the middle of the pyramid, you had an information processing, a bureaucracy class, and at the top of the pyramid, you had your owners of capital and your entrepreneurs and your creative class. But we know what's happening already, as we go into this information revolution. The bottom of that pyramid, automation, is going to take over. Even that middle tier, information processing, that's what computers are good at.
A to nije nešto što je prosto "lepo imati". Mislim da je to društveni imperativ. Napuštamo nešto što biste nazvali industrijskim dobom i ulazimo u informacionu revoluciju. I jasno je da se neke stvari dešavaju. U industrijskom dobu društvo je bilo piramida. U osnovi piramide vam je bila potrebna ljudska radna snaga. U sredini piramidem imali ste obradu informacija, birokratsku klasu, a na vrhu piramide ste imali vlasnike kapitala i preduzetnike i klasu kreativaca. Ali znamo šta se već dešava, kako zalazimo u ovu informacionu revoluciju. Dno piramide će da preuzme automatizacija. Čak će i taj središnji nivo, obradu informacija - kompjuteri su dobri u tome.
So as a society, we have a question: All this new productivity is happening because of this technology, but who participates in it? Is it just going to be that very top of the pyramid, in which case, what does everyone else do? How do they operate? Or do we do something that's more aspirational? Do we actually attempt to invert the pyramid, where you have a large creative class, where almost everyone can participate as an entrepreneur, an artist, as a researcher?
Pa, kao društvo, imamo dilemu: sva ova nova produktivnost se dešava zbog ove tehnologije, ali ko učestvuje u tome? Da li će to da bude jedino sami vrh piramide, u tom slučaju šta će svi ostali da rade? Kako da oni funkcionišu? Ili da uradimo nešto ambicioznije? Da li da pokušamo do obrnemo piramidu, gde biste imali široku klasu kreativaca, gde bi skoro svako mogao da učestvuje kao preduzetnik, umetnik, istraživač?
And I don't think that this is utopian. I really think that this is all based on the idea that if we let people tap into their potential by mastering concepts, by being able to exercise agency over their learning, that they can get there. And when you think of it as just a citizen of the world, it's pretty exciting. I mean, think about the type of equity we can we have, and the rate at which civilization could even progress. And so, I'm pretty optimistic about it. I think it's going to be a pretty exciting time to be alive.
I ja ovo ne smatram utopijom. Zaista smatram da je sve ovo zasnovano na ideji da ako dozvolimo ljudima da ostvare svoj potencijal savlađujući koncepte, omogućujući im da ovladaju svojim učenjem, da mogu da stignu dotle. A kada razmilite o tome, prosto kao građanin sveta, prilično je uzbudljivo. Mislim, razmislite o vidu jednakosti koji bismo imali, i stepenu do kog bi civilizacija čak mogla da napreduje. Dakle, prilično sam optimističan u vezi s tim. Smatram da će to da bude veoma uzbudljivo doba za život.
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Applause)
(Aplauz)