A great article: Competing Paradigms and Educational Reform that asks,

What has this dominant paradigm actually done for public education except manufacture a crisis?

Not only does it list initiatives and consequences of this paradigm (read the post!), it also suggests a paradigm shift with the following perspective:

• Human freedom and empowerment are more critical than accountability and punishment.
• Life is about relationships, not acquisition.
• School is a democratic experience.
• Caring and trust for each person is the center of any truly professional activity.
• Schools are to improve society as a whole, not providing competitive advantage to the elite.
• Curriculum is best derived from the needs and interests of the learners.
• Developmental appropriateness should supersede national assessment.
• School failure is the result of a variety of political and economic causes.

“Supporters of this alternate perspective maintain that education is a process based on trust, not doubt and suspicion (Bryk & Schneider 2002). The crucial elements that will sustain school improvement is not high-stakes testing, standards, or reactionary accountability programs – “it is simple human trust… that rests on four supports: respect, competency, integrity, and personal regard for others” (George 2006).

“Real education is built on meaningful relationships. We do not learn things in isolation from each other. The core components of education are based on learner-centered values, a respect for diversity and complexity, tolerance, and empowerment. The developmental needs for learners are widespread and cannot be easily or meaningfully reduced to a pencil-based exam.”

This fits so well with where my thinking has been of late. To add to Christopher’s idea that the shift will come from the grassroots/bottom up, I am reminded of Dave Sands comment that, “Students will change education.”