Peter Greene writes here about one of the worst education ideas of the decade, an idea so bad that only Betsy DeVos and Jeb Bush could like it: He calls it “Learning Everywhere.” That translates into “Learning everywhere except in a public school.”
Here is the most important thing to know about the state commissioner of education: All of his children were home-schooled.
Frank Edelblut was a businessman, venture capitalist, and one-term NH state representative before he decided to run for the governor’s seat. He was beaten in the primary by Chris Sununu, son of former NH governor and Bush I White House Chief of Staff John Sununu (full disclosure: my grandmother was a NH GOP representative for decades, including under John Sununu, and she did not have a very high opinion of him). Edelblut gracefully conceded and publicly supported Sununu, who then appointed Edelblut to the top education job, despite Edelblut’s complete lack of anything remotely resembling education experience.
All of Edelblut’s children were home schooled. As a legislator, he backed vouchers and as a candidate he backed personalized [sic] learning. [Governor] Sununu said that the homeschooling was a plus because it meant Edelblut understood alternative methods of education.
What is “Learning Everywhere”?
Back in the 1960s, this approach was called “deschooling,” and it was associated with Ivan Illich. But now it is gussied up, and it is simply outsourcing.
Think of it as homeschooling on a statewide scale.
Learn Everywhere is a proposal to allow students to replace public school courses with coursework offered by private and nonprofit organizations. It is a mechanism for outsourcing public education…
The overall approach is similar to what we’ve seen with micro-credentials, but it keeps the framework of the public school credits. You attend a course or program that has been approved by the state DOE, and upon completion, you get a certificate that you present to your home school for course credit.
There are a variety of issues here, and the department, to its credit, anticipates most of them.
Time issues? You could duplicate classes, such as taking an outsourced drama class and also your school’s drama class, but if the outside class is cutting into homework time, drop the school course and take a study hall. The site does not address what happens is you take so many outside courses that your day is mostly study halls. Can you just stop attending public school entirely?
Funding and Equity? Part of what makes this saleable is that it doesn’t take a cent from public schools at this time; the families are responsible for paying for the outside courses. This in turn raises another question– Edelblut is selling this, hard, on the notion that it will solve the equity problems of public schools and help raise up struggling students, but if the families have to pay for the courses, that would seem to lock poor students out of Learn Everywhere, which would seem to be the opposite of what Edelblut is advertising. The website addresses this issue with a resounding, “Well, we don’t know.” Some of these programs might be free. Businesses might want to pay to send students to programs that would be useful for that business. Families that can’t afford full tuition at a Philips Exeter might be able to afford one course.
In other words, all of Edelblut’s talk about how this program will close the opportunity gap and increase equity in New Hampshire is pretty much bullshit.
Greene suggests that if you live in New Hampshire, you might consider calling a member of the state board of education, which will be considering this goofy proposal on June 13.

This is where our Title 1 District is heading. Our Dear Leaders brag up “Learning Anytime, Anywhere.” Chrome books for all, TNTP to tell us in August what we must do (because teachers don’t know how to teach), and a dismissal of any memorization and physical books because, as our superintendent proudly told the business community, students can do a Google search on their cell phones!
(I’m sure the long game is for the District to quit wasting so much money on those darn teacher salaries, because Google will do it all!)
LikeLike
Learning everywhere is basically a bridge to nowhere.
It’s just an excuse to teach religion rather than all the evil stuff that public schools teach (biology, sex education, climate change, etc)
LikeLike
Yep!
LikeLike
Insane!
LikeLike
This looks very much like the scheme depicted on page four of USDE’s proposal (six citations of publications from the B&M Gates Foundation) with the last line in the info-graphic praising “anywhere, anytime leaerning.” This is the same language and vision promoted by the edtech industry and one of their non-profit lobby outfits: KnowledgeWorks.org https://tech.ed.gov/files/2017/01/NETP17.pdf
LikeLike
A while back you reviewed (and, IIRC, seemed to like) Ted Dintersmith’s book Most Likely To Succeed. I never did finish that book, but if I’m remembering it correctly, that’s what it was all about. The schools of the future will be schools without walls – learning anything anywhere, because that’s what kids will need to be ready for the “innovative” and “creative” jobs of tomorrow, because regular jobs won’t exist any more (meaning that roughly 6 billion of us will be superfluous).
LikeLike
Dienne, Who reviewed Dintersmith’s book? To whom is your comment directed?
LikeLike
We already are superfluous as far as the vast majority of our Reprehensitives are concerned (and no that’s not a typo)
LikeLike
Voting them out of office is the only way to get them to pay attention.
LikeLike
Didn’t we used to have learn anytime anywhere when we all just got big enough to go to work? If you wanted to eat, you worked. Learning? Not so much. It took too much time working to stay alive to learn much beyond the job.
LikeLike
Dienne & Diane–I do seem to recall someone here did write about Dintersmith’s book, but that person wasn’t Diane, to the best of my recollection.
LikeLike
I never reviewed Dintersmith’s book because he began with the premise that “our schools are failing” and I reject that assertion.
LikeLike
We should never confuse reckless and irresponsible with “innovative.” This sounds like a proposal for the state to squirm out of its responsibility to educate all students..
LikeLike
Impeccably Disruptive
Reckless Reform
Is really the norm
And shiftless to boot
But dressed in a suit!
LikeLike
In other NH education news…http://indepthnh.org/2019/06/05/judge-rules-in-favor-of-school-districts-finds-gross-inequities-in-opportunities/
LikeLike
Extremes meet: hippie-hero Ivan Illych’s “deschooling” now embraced by right-wingers like Edelblut. Left and Right join to beat up the traditional school.
LikeLike
This is like Pear$on’$ platform, “Always Earning.”
Now this scheme can be called “Earning Everywhere.”
LikeLike
It’s only goofy if you have a vented interest in holding on to the status quo. The world is moving and school needs to change with it. Whether you like it or not schools need to evolve and they will in one way or the other. If traditional district public schools want to exist into the future they need to recognize that how people learn and want to gather information is very different outside of school compared to what happens inside of school. https://deschooling.education/2018/02/18/reinvent-the-school-or-deschool-education/
LikeLike
We have some good clues about what NOT to do. And other lessons about what should be done.
Do not turn public money over to private entrepreneurs or corporate chains to operate schools based on 100-year-old concepts of behaviorism.
Do not divert public funding to religious schools to teach science and history from the Bible.
Do fund every school equitably and adequately.
Reduce class sizes, especially for children with the greatest needs.
Do require every teacher to be well-educated and wellprepared to teach as a professional, not a temp.
De-emphasize standardized testing.
Emphasize the arts, play, science, history, literature, active learning.
Make college affordable or tuition-free.
Ensure that every child has the nutrition and medical care they need.
Reduce poverty.
Those are the lessons of the past century.
LikeLike
Peter Wieczorek,
Let’s talk about change. Technology is not really changing the world and making it a better place. It just changes the way we communicate and gather knowledge.
For instance, the way we communicate has changed: texting, e-mails, telephones. It has changed so much that too many people spend more time interacting with long distance friends they never meet in person instead of developing relationships in their own local community. And spending too much time staring at screens is not healthy – I rule this one as a negative improvement.
https://www.carewellurgentcare.com/2018/07/19/the-effects-too-much-screen-time-has-on-your-health/
And that “wonderful” change called texting is killing people.
“Texting and driving increase the risk of an accident by about 23 times. Cell phone use is behind only drivers “being lost in thought” in causing the most distracted driving accidents. About 25% of teenagers admit to answering texts once or more every time they drive.”
I guess the way we get from point A to point B has changed, but it really hasn’t. We just get from point A to point B faster. Instead of traveling for weeks or months to visit the other side of the world, we hop on a crowded passenger jet and sit in cramped seats breathing unhealthy air and eating crappy food while watching mindless flast screen entertainment, unless we can afford 1st class, and spend a few hours reaching that other country. The side effect of traveling long distances in such a short period of time is called jet lag. Frequent flying is unhealthy – I rule this one as a negative improvement.
https://www.netdoctor.co.uk/healthy-living/home-and-travel/a28333/flying-health/
Humans are social animals, well at least most of us are, and children with real teachers in small class sizes is a good thing.
I want to know if you think the way public schools have operated has changed at all since the 19th century.
If you think they have not changed since the 19th century, then I say you are out of touch and totally wrong. I taught for thirty years (1975 – 2005) in the public schools and the way we taught and the material we used was changing all the time. Because of those changes, teachers like me were required to update our education in regards to teaching and the subject we taught on a regular basis and offer proof of what we were learning and how it was changing the way we teach our students or lose our teaching credential.
So, technology aside, the way teachers teach and the material teachers have access to to teach their students is changing all the time. Technology is just a tool like a textbook.
And as a teacher for thirty years, I used technology and/or textbooks and/or teacher made material as I saw fit. Just like teachers do in Finland. Teachers in Finland are not forced to change just because someone things they should change.
Just because old fashioned records changed to CD’s, and videos changed to DVD’s and CD’s and DVD’s changed to streaming, doesn’t mean those changes are good and have to happen.
In fact, people still ride horses, walk, and ride bikes and some cities are being redesigned and rebuilt to make the people friendly instead of car-friendly so they will get out and actually spend time with real people instead of sending e-mails and/or texts to someone they might never meet in person.
LikeLike
Lloyd, I think you are missing the point. Many students today are learning far more and far more relevantly outside of school than they are in school. Why is that? Students are accessing networks that were not available to them in the past. Some of those networks are virtual, but not all of them. We as educators no longer hold exclusive access to knowledge. Learning needs to be personal, just look to the work of Sugata Mitra https://www.ted.com/talks/sugata_mitra_the_child_driven_education, Ken Robinson https://www.ted.com/talks/ken_robinson_says_schools_kill_creativity, the work of Elliot Washor and Big Picture Learning https://hundred.org/en/articles/elliot-washor-we-need-to-put-the-person-in-personalization, and the Hack Schooling movement https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h11u3vtcpaY.
Sure school has changed over time, technology has been added and upgraded, but it is essentially the same as it has always been – teachers instruct a group of students, all with the same content siloed material, at the same time, and students are all assessed using the same rubric. There might be minor tweaks to that model, but for the most part American high schoolers are all taught in this same manner and we wonder why they are disengaged.
If you don’t understand the need and the reality of learning everywhere, then I think it is you who is out of touch. Schools need to recognize that the technology Genie is out of the bottle and it’s not going back in. Schools and teachers need to move to the forefront of the open access, open source world that our students live in. It’s not just about technology, however, students become increasingly disengaged the longer they stay in school https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2016/03/23/gallup-student-poll-finds-engagement-in-school.html
As a life long educator it might be hard to re-envision a world where students don’t spend their entire day in the school building, but instead have schedules that might enroll them in colleges, universities or trade school for part of the day, or have them interning offsite or learning from a community expert, or going to another school for a course that isn’t offered at their own school, or working independently at a place of their choosing, or even learning through long term out of school placements or through travel. Instead of fighting this inevitability schools should take the lead.
LikeLike
True, learning takes place everywhere 24/7, once born, and not exclusively in a classroom.
So, once born, learning never ends, but we cannot let children learn in a vacuum on their own through the wild-west of the internet where anything goes as it exists in the United States. The internet has become a mind field of horrors. Without the guidance of a highly educated professional teacher, children and adolescents are at risk of being devoured and destroyed.
The purpose of brick-and-mortar public schools controlled by locally elected school boards in a real-world environment instead of a virtual one builds the foundation for our Constitutional Republic.
In addition, it takes about 25-years for our brains to reach maturity, and during our adolescent years from about age 12 to 25, the way our brains work is a double-edged sword that shouts for guidance from professionally trained teachers who are partners with parents/guardians to help students through an organized education with counselors to offer help when making choices between the many programs most schools offer that is called electives — a system designed to support the civilization those children were born into.
Have you ever heard of or read Math Babe Cathy O’Neil?
“Mathematician Cathy O’Neil says algorithms embed existing bias into code — with potentially destructive outcomes. Everyone should question their fairness, not just computer scientists and coders.”
https://www.npr.org/2018/01/26/580617998/cathy-oneil-do-algorithms-perpetuate-human-bias
When we turn over the education of our children to computers and/or the virtual world of the internet, we also surrender control to the program, the bias of the algorithm, as Cathy O’Neil explains with “potentially destructive outcomes.”
Compare the biased algorithm/s automatically guiding a child through virtual education vs a child who has 30-to-50 different flesh-and-blood professional teachers K -12, there is no competition. If you take the time to check you will discover that all teachers are not all liberals. About a third of public school teachers are registered Republicans and are conservatives. Most of the rest is divided up between Democrats and Independent voters.
Flesh-and-blood professional human teachers paid a living wage with benefits are much better than any virtual school algorithm will ever be.
The flesh-and-blood professional teachers with small class sizes will always be better than the cyber charters and corporate charters and voucher schools.
LikeLike