Resonant Researcher

Reflections on Collins & Halverson, Chapters 4 & 8

Reading Chapters 4 and 8 of Collins & Halverson reminded me just how much the educational landscape is in flux, and how slow traditional systems have been to respond to the pace of technological and societal change. Chapter 4, in particular, raised some important questions about the balance of power in learning, who controls what students learn, when they learn it, and how that learning is measured.

One key idea that stood out was the contrast between schooling and informal learning environments. Schools still operate under a top-down structure where the teacher holds most of the authority, but outside of school, students are engaging with content that they choose, on platforms they understand better than most adults. In many ways, they’re already functioning in a personalized, self-directed learning model, but it’s happening despite school, not because of it.

Chapter 8 pushed this idea even further by asking whether schools as we know them are becoming obsolete. It’s a tough question, but a fair one. Schools still matter, absolutely, but their resistance to evolving with the digital age creates a widening disconnect between what students experience in class, and what they encounter in their daily lives. When kids can learn to play an instrument, edit video, or code just by watching YouTube tutorials, it challenges the traditional idea that learning must be mediated by certified experts in a classroom.

That said, I don’t think it’s about throwing away the school model entirely, instead, I see these chapters as a call to reimagine education, to shift from being gatekeepers of knowledge, to curators and facilitators of learning. Technology has made learning more accessible and more customizable, but we still need educators to help students think critically, evaluate sources, and connect ideas across disciplines.

For schooling to remain a central part of society, there needs to be a clear understanding that educators are, above all, facilitators. While they may need to step into an authoritative role at times, that authority should never involve gatekeeping knowledge or limiting students’ and stakeholders’ access to learning and meaningful connection.