To design a school system, we'd first have to figure out what the purpose of school is. School has been variously described as a rite of passage; a place for establishing (or fixing) cultural norms; preparation for college or the workplace; a place to learn.

I was formerly affiliated with the Coalition of Essential Schools, and I think the philosophy espoused in the Coalition's "common principles" describe the basics of what a school should be: the purpose of school is to help all students learn to use their minds well. To do this, education needs to be personalized, so that each student, while part of a group, is treated as an individual. Student progress is marked by meaningful demonstrations or "exhibitions" of work -- not mindless worksheets or standardized assessments which provide only the narrowest view of a student's abilities. (See the Coalition's web site, http://www.ces.brown.edu, for more details.)

There are a few key points I would then want to have in my ideal school:

1. Individual education plans for all students. In special education, we've learned to develop growth plans for each student so that he or she can reach a maximum potential. For other kids, most schools do little more than label them as 'honors' or 'vocational.' Every student should have short-term and long-term goals that describes the work that he or she does in school.

2. Teachers who can get to know every student well. I would want teachers to be viewed like doctors. A student and his or her parents should have a teacher who knows that Keisa is a visual learner or that Carlos takes a while to warm up to people -- that is, a teacher who knows the student's history and tendencies, but also is aware of what kinds of goals should be set. Just as family doctors refer to specialists, a student's primary teacher would make references to other teachers. Most critically (and here's where the deep pockets come in), teachers would have a limited number of students that they were responsible for -- say, no more than 30.

3. Opportunities for many different kinds of educational experiences. Much educational rhetoric is wasted on defending or attacking various programs -- such as the whole language vs. phonics debate. The reality is that different approaches work better for different students. (For that matter, the same student probably needs different approaches at various points in her development.) Students should have the opportunity to create, and the opportunity to memorize. They should learn to work independently and in groups. They should be able to follow instructions, and they should have the chance to design their own projects.

4. Opportunities for students to demonstrate their skills and knowledge. The student's individual education plan will have goals. The student and his advising teacher need to assess his progress towards those goals -- and that is best done by examining student work that comes from the educational experiences. A portfolio of student work, coupled with teacher assessments, will allow the student, parents, and teacher to figure out what will help the student move forward.

So -- where does technology fit?

If a school could design all of these things without using any technology, I'd still think it was an amazing school. Still, I think technology could be helpful. Video and web connections could make many more opportunities, as described in number 3 above, available to all students. My work has, for the past few years, focused on the development of "digital portfolios," which allows students to demonstrate their progress towards goals by digitizing their work, and appropriate other information (such as the assignment and evaluation).

What CANNOT be digitized is the regular contact among teachers, students, and parents for purposes described in numbers 1 and 2 above. A primary teacher might refer a student to another teacher or a particular experience available on the net, but the primary teacher's responsibility to get to know each student well can only be done through regular face-to-face interaction.

I look forward to the day when schools consider themselves and, in fact, become knowledge-making places. Places where students and teachers

-use language for narration, exposition and argument in non-linear media

-make new mathematics by making and exploring conjectures

-collect and analyze data critically

-build and analyze models of the natural & social world in which they live

-locate with precision the information they need

-evaluate the validity and veracity of the information they obtain

-create and perform their own artistic compositions

All this is possible with software and hardware that is now widespread. The fact that these sorts of things are not characteristic of today's schools is not a failure of the availability of hardware. It is a failure of will on the part of the American public to demand them.

We are often told of the tremendous importance of the computer in our present and future lives. Great efforts are being made to build a physical infrastructure to support the vision of widespread computers in the schools. But there is little reason to believe that simply putting more computers and introducing greater connectivity into the schools will lead to attaining goals of this sort.

Quite aside from the non-academic needs of our children and the failing physical infrastructure of our school buildings:

-We need to have better educated teachers who regard themselves as lifelong learners of their subjects and who are treated with the respect they deserve.

-We need to have much wider, and intellectually richer curricular materials than are currently available from a small number of publishers who "dumb down" their materials in order to procure approvals from a small number of states with large numbers of students.

-We need to stop assessing the performance of students, teachers and school systems with assessment instruments that are both secret and intellectually impoverished and that convey the not very subtle message that anything worth assessing can be reduced to a set of five mutually exclusive choices.

Somebody years ago said to me technology is just a tool. Think of what you would like to have happen and then look for the technology to make that possible. Not surprisingly our subsequent conversations have also focused on how my experiences with technology in the classroom have both refined and expanded my conception of what can happen in a school. Following his initial counsel though, I will leave it to the others to explore the amazing technological possibilities available to a school with deep pockets. Instead I'd like to focus on the two aspects of education which I believe must serve as prime considerations in any future school design--the fostering of relationships and the opportunity for reflection. Both of these considerations can be enhanced by technology or thwarted by it.

Too often it has seemed to me that as a school's technology capabilities have grown, the relationships between teachers and students and also students and students have been adversely affected. The blame lies not so much with the technology but with many teachers' inability to rethink what is happening in their classrooms when students are engaged so individually and often so idiosyncratically. The problem also results from placement of computers and related technology in configurations which preclude interactions with others. When I look at the now myriad suggestions for the digital school of the future, I seldom see addressed the need for a school to be a community of learners. When I raise the issue with others, I hear a lot of vague references to networking and corporate communication systems which remind me of English teachers who foster writing skills by having kids write memos to each other all year. (A good strategy with some pretty obvious limitations) I have no clear ideas about how to address this issue of relationships, but I am certain that it must be addressed in clear and substantive ways as school technology plans are being created

My second consideration is the need for reflection both by students and the larger school community. In some ways technology enhances our ability to be reflective as we can so easily collate information, store student work, amend our intellectual products. The problem here is twofold. First when it is possible to save virtually everything, how do we decide what information will be gathered, what work will be saved, what will be amended? Deliberate attention to systematizing the saving in ways that foster reflection must occur. Is that discussion happening as the digital school is being planned? The second problem lies in the innate forward thrust of technology. The new is always at hand demanding to be mastered and used. This corresponds with and potentially exacerbates the natural rhythm of school where planning the next unit or working on the next assigned project is too frequently the most pressing concern. How will the digital school slow the momentum long enough and regularly enough for reflection by students and teachers to occur?

Since you've given me the unthinkable gifts for education -- deep fiscal pockets, complete autonomy, and a license to dream -- here goes.

I see school systems becoming smaller, more centralized, and much more focused on the too-often-forgotten customer: the student. Buildings will be used in an entirely different way, as students/learners work independently online from homes or other locations most of the time. They'll be built for maximum utility and flexibility; with modern lightweight (probably completely modular) construction. We won't need classic or expensive architectural design for design's sake, nor expansive rolling grounds. We will need year-round efficiency for classes that go from early morning to late night; areas adaptable to groups from early childhood to senior citizens to business and community members; and interfaces among outlying classrooms or facilities.

Buildings will be simple but high-tech, central hubs of facilitation staffed by technology and programming experts, and a new breed of teacher/facilitator and trainer. Extensive and sophisticated VR facilities will be integral to student instruction, as well as for teacher, industry, and community training. I think multiple levels of administration will be a thing of the past, and teachers will work directly with individual students and parents (often from their homes or other locations). There will be new accountability, standards that merge academic rigor with application. Most education decisions will be made locally.

Schools, homes, and libraries will be completely connected by fiberoptics or satellites (or more likely, a combination), which will also link outlying branch schools. All communications technology for students will be housed in a single, increasingly smaller TV-like box, rather than separate components (TV, computer, telephone, modem, etc.). As new technologies or applications are developed, they'll be incorporated immediately into this learning center -- according to industry and parent and community needs. School funding will be supplemented by industry and community monies driven by self interest: industry will constantly update the central school as to new skills, equipment, jobs, and product development activities and specify skills, education, and jobs or internships needed -- establishing a feeder system of tailor-made employees into those industries at all levels.

Key in-school activities will develop essential learning skills, which will prepare students to reason, to think critically and independently, and to discriminate among web resources, propaganda, and unsafe or unsuitable material. School activities will seriously address students' social and physical needs (including lifelong health education) that can't be taught well on the Internet, and exploration of life paths. Education will be a true partnership, with parents, teachers, community/industry members, and students all collaborating and accepting responsibility for learning success. Parents, trained as to their role in a child's education, will focus and guide students' online studies. And communities will be educated about the benefits of an educated populace and participate in the process.

Everyone will benefit from, and buy into the concept of maximum development of the individual. Instruction won't be assigned by chronological age, perceived talent, or intelligence -- but according to carefully assessed developmental stage, interest, learning style, and ability. All six-year-olds won't study the same thing in the same way, with the same adult expectations. Learning will be truly personalized and targeted to individual success. And since we know that these learners can expect to change vocations at least five times over a lifetime, children will be trained to be flexible and to adapt; and to expect, relish, and exploit change as a positive force.

Students will spend time online completing assignments, exploring, and meeting challenges with teachers, counselors, or experts as needed. They'll interact with online or regular classrooms -- or with groups all over the world, attending Russian classes in Russia or incorporating onsite field trips in Montana or Israel with geology classes. Students will spend time on "life experience" throughout their education -- community service, apprenticeships, volunteerism -- and will be encouraged to vary these situations for maximum interest exploration. Why shouldn't students experience guided slices of life -- and not just be thrown to the real-world wolves as we were?

Because of the extraordinary rate of change and diversity in this education environment, teacher unions, tenure, and longevity provisions won't exist. Educators will survive by growing and changing in advance of their students and technology -- and with societal and technological change. Pedagogy will be redefined, as teachers become development, resource, and facilitation experts. For teachers, professional development and career-long training will be essential. Excellence in teaching will be recognized and honored as never before.