Many education systems around the world currently employ a blended school education approach, combining, to varying degrees, 20-80% of face-to-face learning and teaching, blended learning, and digital online learning. To clarify, if face-to-face learning occurs 1-80% of the time, the approach is traditional and rigid. If the opposite occurs, where digital learning and teaching are connected to the internet via electronic equipment and devices 1-80% of the time, the approach is electronic online. If the proportion of face-to-face or digital learning is between 20-80%, the approach is blended.
Educational renewal has become possible and has great potential for success due to the widespread spread of globalization, digital information and communication technology, and the diverse electronic spaces across the internet and the World Wide Web, wireless networks, satellite broadcasting stations, digital information and scientific research centers, video conferencing, mobile phones and tablets, e-chatting, and, not least, smart schools and digital communities.
Examples of alternatives, some of which have recently begun to be implemented in Western environments, and are barely being tested hesitantly in a number of developing Arab environments, can be leveraged to accelerate and successfully implement the “Learning and Building the Future is a Natural Right for Every Individual” program: online digital education, blended education, blended clinical education, self-led learning, teacher-directed learning, transnational blended education, and others that are possible or may emerge in the future.
It is not sufficient to simply cultivate the new alternatives mentioned above. Rather, to integrate and enhance the performance of these alternatives, profound digital changes are required in: curricula, teaching, study and learning, the level of systematic achievement, digital school facilities and equipment, classroom organizations for learning and guidance, daily study schedules, the roles of learners, teachers, and support services, and the educational testing and assessment system.
Transforming the Practice of Examinations into a Comprehensive, Dynamic System of Educational Assessment and Evaluation
The achievement “examinations” that have been in use for decades, administered at the middle and end of the school year, are riddled with numerous flaws in their title, role, methods, stages, procedural controls, analysis and interpretation of results, and their use in guiding learning, teaching, and support services.
Fundamental reforms to the nature, objectives, factors, processes, and outcomes of this process are necessary to transform its collective and personal approach into an integrated educational assessment system sensitive to the reality of school learning. This system can address students individually and in small groups and respond to their cognitive demands and diverse learning and achievement needs.
The new educational assessment system consists of three standard types of learning: analytical diagnostic, formative, and final/summative.
The analytical diagnostic assessment of individual students’ prior learning knowledge and experiences produces the following data:
* Curricular needs that are immediately satisfied by individual students and are exempted from studying them to prevent useless repetition, while they build upon them for subsequent higher types of learning.
* Learning needs that are completely lacking among students and must be learned and acquired from nothing.
* Learning needs observed among individual students, but with incomplete achievement scores that may range from 10-90%. Here, the knowledge, values, and skills missing from those prescribed by the curriculum are supplemented.
Interim formative assessment results in new types and levels of learning achieved through study and teaching. These achievement outcomes are part of the third type of educational assessment of learning: the overall final assessment, which reveals the quality or adequacy of achievement by comparing standard qualitative, quantitative, and qualitative specifications with their observed counterparts. This generally leads to qualitative assessments such as: A: Excellent, B: Very Good, C: Good, D: Acceptable, E: Fail.
However, the success, failure, and achievement ratings in the “Learning Vision,” based on a grading system sensitive to the reality of learning, are as follows:
The “Learning Vision,” with its educational structure, emphasizes an achievement philosophy that at least 90% of learners pass their courses with grades of “Very Good” and “Excellent.”
The remaining 10% indicates that students have temporarily failed due to personal, family, or environmental reasons. These students are permitted, in coordination with the school, to take subsequent courses to retake courses in which they failed or whose grades were below the required level for success.
As for the success ratings in the “Learning Vision,” its conditions and achievement ratings, they are as follows:
* Ordinary intellectuals with achievement scores of 60-69% and acceptable and acceptable+ grades for subjects outside the major or academic track. These include elective subjects, school, college, or university requirements, and other subjects outside the major or track, such as literature courses, while scientific studies are an example of this. Regular learners study 25-35% of the core curriculum, the curriculum content of which is determined by the teacher, with attendance of at least 25% and a final exam.
* Advanced learners with grades of 70-79% with good and good+ grades for subjects within the specialization or academic track. These represent the minimum thresholds for success in learning and achieving the course according to the “Learning Vision.”
Advanced learners study 50% of the core curriculum, the curriculum content of which is determined by the teacher, and 50% of the secondary information. They attend at least 50% of the course and take an interim and final exam in the subject.
* Professionals/employees in the study or specialization with grades of 80-89% with very good and very good+ grades for academic or professional practical subjects.
Professionals study 90% of the curriculum and attend according to the established schedule. They are assigned a project or report in the curriculum area, either individually or in small groups. They also take two general exams (midterm or academic year) and a final exam. Each student is also assigned to provide private tutoring to 1-3 peers with a high achievement score.
*Creative students in thought or work with achievement grades that may reach 150 or 200%, with grades of excellent (91-100%), excellent+ (101-150%), and outstanding (151-200%).
Creative students study the entire curriculum and attend daily classes in coordination with the school. They may be partially or completely exempted from the daily routine. They take part in part or all of the midterm and final exams, either in person or online, and are assigned several projects, research, and independent readings in the subject. They are also required to study and discuss one to three additional academic references, depending on the circumstances of the gifted learners, the diversity of university courses, the availability of library and online resources, and the university, school, and local environments that encourage research and investigation.
Renewing “Vision of Learning” School Services to Enhance Academic Achievement and Future Building
A sample of these services is as follows:
Developing school facilities and equipment to accommodate the “Vision of Learning and Future Building”
School facilities and equipment under the “Vision” education differ from their current collective counterparts, which are limited to the traditional classroom, in form and practical role. They are primarily implemented:
* Individually and in small groups.
* Targeted at enabling individual students to achieve at least 90% of their learning and achievement, and to build the future they aspire to.
* They rely on the use of various digital communication and information technology equipment and devices, including mobile phones, tablets, laptops, Wi-Fi, wireless broadcasting, and digital information websites. Learning, teaching, and educational assessment are conducted face-to-face and digitally online, and conferences, discussions, and electronic conversations are held via Skype, mobile phones, tablets, and many others.
School facilities and equipment capable of accommodating the “Vision of Learning” combine real-world experiences with digital information technology to produce a hybrid model called “Blended” facilities and equipment. Facilities & Equipment: such as integrated classrooms, integrated libraries, computer/internet labs, internet-connected science labs, and integrated learning cubicles.
Renewing the Interrelationship between Schools in the City or Educational District and the World
Globalization and digital information and communication technology have long since brought about the introversion of individuals, families, and institutions, including schools—the most important and decisive factor in shaping a person’s personality and future.
Hence, schools are expected not to operate alone in their work and with their own capabilities, but rather to join together in educational ties, leagues, or twinning based on their geographical proximity, shared goals, and shared needs, strengths, and weaknesses to further advance learning and achievement. This explains the nature of school ties or leagues.
Introducing the “Learning Vision and Building the Future” into Schools
Any educational program intended to be adopted in a setting other than its immediate environment, due to its positive characteristics or distinctive tangible results on the ground, requires, before adoption, testing its validity and practical effectiveness in the new environment. This requires a final decision to adopt it and adopt it in local human development plans, or to abandon it due to the failure of the experimental results to support its “practical history” in other similar or foreign previous environments.
In any case, we present the following simplified steps to test the validity and reliability of the “Learning Vision” for national education plans and to respond to the learning needs of young people and to build the future they aspire to, both individually and as groups:
1. Test the “Learning Vision” in randomly selected classes in one or more school levels, and select a counterpart as a control group without testing from several elementary, middle, and secondary schools across a city or educational district, or several of them if possible. Field data should be collected, analyzed, and interpreted by testing its statistical significance using scientific research. Based on the results, the research committees will then make one of the following decisions: adopt the “Learning Vision” as is, adopt it with modifications to some aspects, or abandon it due to its insufficient validity and effectiveness in the school context.
2. Select complete school levels: early elementary, upper elementary, middle, or secondary, and form experimental and control groups. Then, conduct the experiment and make appropriate decisions, similar to those mentioned in Section 1.
3. Adopt intensive training plans and activities for teachers, learners, cadres, and other school services. Prepare classroom and school environments and curricula if the “Learning Vision” is adopted for implementation in schools before actually commencing any fieldwork.
4. Form a central steering committee and a sub-committee in each school to monitor the “Learning Vision” activities in the field, as well as the comments and inquiries of teachers, learners, and school administrators. Respond promptly to these recommendations to maintain educational satisfaction and ensure the stability and enhancement of the “Learning Vision” practice in school education.