'21st-Century Skills': Ban It, or Rename It?

Article Tools
  • PrintPrinter-Friendly
  • EmailEmail Article
  • ReprintReprints
  • CommentsComments

To the Editor:

National Public Radio’s “All Things Considered” used to have occasional segments in which the host and a guest would decide what terms had been so overused they should be forbidden. Right now, I’m ready to dump “global economy,” “at the end of the day,” and “chops,” as in “he/she’s got the chops.”

I was ready to toss “21st-century skills” until I was skimming your recent article on the topic and found it familiar-sounding (“ ‘21st-Century Skills’ Focus Shifts W.Va. Teachers’ Role,” Jan. 7, 2009). Then I decided we could keep the concept, but just rename it. Let’s call it Progressive Education, or Digital Dewey, or The Reincarnation of William Heard Kilpatrick. Kilpatrick, one of John Dewey’s colleagues, wrote “The Project Method” for the September 1918 Teachers College Record. Whatever we choose to call it, the idea describes a much healthier approach to education than “scripted curriculum” or “passing rate.”

It all brings to mind another term that falls in and out of favor: Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose.

Gerald W. Bracey
Port Townsend, Wash.

Vol. 28, Issue 20, Page 26

Published in Print: February 4, 2009, as '21st-Century Skills': Ban It, or Rename It?
Notice: We recently upgraded our comments. (Learn more here.) If you are logged in as a subscriber or registered user and already have a Display Name on edweek.org, you can post comments. If you do not already have a Display Name, please create one here.
Ground Rules for Posting
We encourage lively debate, but please be respectful of others. Profanity and personal attacks are prohibited. By commenting, you are agreeing to abide by our user agreement.
All comments are public.

Back to Top Back to Top

Most Popular Stories