Running head: 21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 1

A Synthesis of Literature on 21st Century Learning

Meredith Mitchell

George Mason University

EDLE 897 Summer 2016

Dr. Scott Bauer

21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 2

The 21st century learning framework is founded in the idea that students require core

competencies and skillsets in a range of areas in order to be successful participants in todays

world (Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin, 2010; Kereluik,

Mishra, Fahnoe & Terry, 2013). Proponents of 21st century frameworks explain that todays

economic and global climate is different than that of previous generations, and our traditional

educational practices do not support the student outcomes that are desirable in the workforce

today (Voogt & Roblin, 2010; Bellanca & Brandt, 2010). Since its inception, the movement

towards infusing 21st century skill building in the classroom has grown and garnered the

attention of researchers and practitioners from multiple educational fields and school contexts.

Several organizations, including most notably the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21), have

defined the purpose, need, and implementation strategies for a 21st century learning reform (Kay

& Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012; Voogt & Roblin, 2010), but this framework that

inherently accepts complexity, flexibility, and a global perspective necessarily requires an

expansive and complex scope of research. James Bellanca and Ron Brandt have edited a

collection of chapters in their book 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn that aims

to introduce the scholar and practitioner to some key aspects and perspectives within the 21st

century learning reform, and do an excellent job conveying the breadth of factors and influences

that impact 21st century learning (2010). Ken Kay and Valerie Greenhill also offer insightful

pathways to understanding a 21st century skill based education in their book The Leaders Guide

to 21st Century Education: 7 Steps for Schools and Districts (2012). Both texts share the

common goal of informing education stakeholders about 21st century learning, but the authors

place different emphases within their approach. Their contributions have both complemented,
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 3

widened, and deepened understandings within three major thematic domains of 21st century

learning and their research serves to inform my future research interests and scholarly endeavors.

In reviewing the literature surrounding 21st century learning, it quickly becomes apparent

that there is a breadth of information that is relevant to this framework. Since 21st century

learning places education in the global context and is based in remaining relevant to the greater

needs of society and the economy today (Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill, 2012), there

are many more complex factors that necessarily should be considered to prepare students rather

than memorization of core content knowledge (Au, 2007). Figure 1 is a concept map that

illustrates how these topics intersect in both books and within my own review of the literature.

Figure 1. 21st century learning topics. Topics are organized by books/knowledge bases in which

they are represented and coded within at least one thematic domain.
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 4

There are multiple areas of intersection and while the three sources of information largely

converge on the same topics and themes related to 21st century learning, there are also topics that

are not equally represented within both texts and my own knowledge of the literature base.

These peripheral topics are either not within the scope of the books, not central to the

understanding of 21st century learning, or most importantly for my purposes, not an area to

which I have devoted enough time or attention. These topics will be essential for me to root out

further in order to ascertain whether or not they will be relevant within my own focus within the

field. It is also important to note that the central intersection, where topics that both books cover

and that I have researched in other scholarly work as well, does not necessarily mean that the

understanding within each information source is congruent. These discrepancies and

comparisons will be clarified throughout this text.

After considering the books and scholarly articles that I have read, the following three

themes emerged as encapsulating the major knowledge domains from which 21st century

learning might be considered: 1) the philosophical/theoretical theme, 2) the

instructional/practical theme, and 3) the political/global theme. While unpacking the scope of

topics in the literature, it became clear that many topics fall into multiple thematic domains,

however, these three categorizations can be used as an organization structure for the literature

and to demonstrate the major emphases of the authors research compared to other literature I

have reviewed. For every 21st century learning topic represented in Figure 1, the topics

thematic domain is coded and its placement within the diagram reflects which of the books or

my knowledge base addresses it. In this paper, I will organize the discussion of topics through

these three domains in order to synthesize how both books and my own understandings relate.
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 5

Philosophical/Theoretical Topics in 21st Century Learning

The first thematic domain that has emerged through my reading of 21st century learning

literature is the philosophical/ theoretical domain. This domain includes all the 21st century

learning literature that discusses the purposes of schooling in the 21st century. These works may

address the ethical considerations for why we must change the way we educate our children and

may also consider the broader societal structures that necessitate this change. Literature that I

am coding in the philosophical/ theoretical category may seem indirectly related to the topic of

21st century learning at first, but these topics are vital for allowing 21st century researchers and

educators to understand what relevant work should happen within schools. Bellanca and

Brandts book (2010) tends to focus more heavily in this domain than either Kay and Greenhills

text (2012) or my own scholarly review. In their collection of chapters from multiple authors,

Howard Gardner contributes a piece entitled Five Minds for the Future in which he

philosophizes on the five types of mindsets that are crucial for society: the disciplined mind, the

synthesizing mind, the creating mind, the respectful mind, and the ethical mind (Gardner, 2010).

Gardner recognizes that these types fall in the cognitive and human sphere, and ideally schools

would foster all five types in every individual (Gardner, 2010). This first chapter in the

collection sets the tone for readers to understand what kind of society we are preparing young

minds for and while it is does not delineate precisely the work that is to be done within schools

to achieve those aims, Gardners work makes a case for using 21st century skills as a way to

develop these types of minds (2010).

While Gardner proposes a specific societal model for his justifications of 21st century

schooling (2010), both books and my current research experiences have also more generally

focused on the purposes of schooling. Bellanca and Brandts book begins with a foreword from
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 6

Ken Kay which provides a very similar introduction compared to how he and Greenhill introduce

their own book (2010; Kay and Greenhill, 2012). In both texts, he cites the statistics from the

U.S. Department of Labor Statistics that indicate how Americans today will hold an average of

over 10 jobs in their lifetime and that research on the business leaders and employers through has

uncovered a diverse range of skillsets that they wish their employees were better able to produce

(Kay, 2010; Kay & Greenhill, 2012). These skillsets, in turn, became the theoretical student

outcomes that P21 and other 21st century learning hope to support. My own reading of Kay and

Greenhills other work (Kay & Greenhill, 2011) underscores the theoretical connection between

schooling and employment preparation, so while these were not new understandings, it

demonstrates that this theoretical basis is central to the discussion of 21st century learning.

Another theoretical topic that has emerged in both texts and my own research is the

theoretical framework proposed by P21; their core skills and competencies are directly aligned in

Kay and Greenhills book (2012) and serve as the foundation upon which other authors build in

Bellanca and Brandts text (2010). In a chapter in Bellancas text, Chris Dede acknowledges that

there are other frameworks for 21st century learning, including those from the Organisation for

Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), the North Central Regional Education

Laboratory and the Metiri Group, and the National Leadership Council for Liberal Education and

Americas Promise, but his research demonstrates that while the language differs within these

frameworks, the ideas are generally the same (2010). My own review and synthesis of literature

on comparing 21st century frameworks demonstrated the same conclusions (Voogt & Roblin,

2010; Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe & Terry, 2013). This findings from Dedes research and my

previous literature review uncovers that the frameworks are both divergent and convergent and

while the terminology and framing in current use differs, it does not seem that this should serve
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 7

as an obstacle for 21st century learning implementation and practice (2010; Voogt & Roblin,

2010; Kereluik, Mishra, Fahnoe & Terry, 2013). While it would seem difficult to implement an

amorphous and subjective concept of 21st century skills, the convergence of meaning (despite a

divergence of terminology) points to the notion that a school system need only to frame the

concept of 21st century learning using whatever terminology they prefer, as the underlying

concepts are the same. Research based in P21 competencies is commonly referenced, flexibly

written for open interpretations, and therefore very generalizable for discussions surrounding 21st

century learning. While it is not the only framework for 21st century competencies, P21 is an

appropriate framework to encapsulate the central tenets of 21st century learning.

Both Bellanca and Brandts text as well as my own review of literature have more greatly

emphasized the historical role of accountability than the Kay and Greenhill text. In one of the

first chapters of 21s Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn, Bellanca interview Linda

Darling- Hammond who talks about the ways the accountability structures developed in America

have constricted our ability to serve students (2010). She explains I think we were on the right

track in the early 1990s, especially in the efforts to create new content standards that

incorporated the cognitive skills. However, pendulum swings in the conceptualization of what

students need to learn and how they need to learn it have been very destructive (2010, p. 38).

Her discussion of the increasing demands for fact based recall through the years following

NCLB, help paint the picture for why there is demand for a new system today (Darling-

Hammond, 2010). The book also contains a chapter written by Douglas Reeves that

characterizes assessments on three spectrums: standardized vs non-standardized, secret vs. open,

and individual vs. team-based (2010). Reeves discusses how our current accountability system

has grown into one extreme of each of the three spectrums (standardized, secret, and individual)
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 8

and how this shift over time actually has worked against our purposes for students (Reeves,

2010). The final contribution from the Bellanca and Brandt text that focuses on the topic of

historical accountability is from the afterword contributed by Andy Hargreaves (2010).

Hargreaves refers to four eras of education which he titles the Four Ways (2010). In his First

Way, Hargreaves writes of the somewhat lackadaisical approach to accountability and

education in general and describes how the autonomy allowed for effective teachers to thrive, but

also let ineffective teachers flounder without consequence (2010). The result was inequitable

educational opportunities for students. In the Second Way, more rigid accountability

structures have only served to control what it is that teachers teach and while the standards in

many places may have risen, it has effectively done nothing to improve student achievement.

Hargreaves explains that we are on the cusp of the Third Way, which is marked by tensions

and fluctuations about how accountability should be used, and he explains that the political

unstable climate will perpetuate the tenuous climate until we can, if ever, reach a Fourth Way.

The Fourth Way has been achieved from other notable countries as Finland and Singapore who

have the stability and vision to account for student learning in a more holistic way. These three

chapters from the Bellanca and Brandt text contribute to my own understandings from the

literature based largely on research from work from authors such as Daniel Resnick, Janet

Thomas, Kevin Brady, Wayne Au, and David Hursh. Resnicks historical research describes

how schools in the early 20th century used assessment strictly for their own evaluative purposes,

but in the decades that followed (and with a marked increase in the 1960s with the civil rights

movement), assessments took an increasingly larger role in educational systems largely to

promote more equal opportunities within the public school system (Resnick, 1980). Later, the

passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the publication A Nation at Risk, and
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 9

the Bush and Clinton programs (America 2000 and Goals 2000, respectively), perpetuated a need

for and reliance on standardized testing data on content knowledge (Thomas & Brady, 2005). As

the federal government became increasingly entwined with education at the state and district

level over time, so increased the stakes of these tests, the emphasis placed on standardized

testing, and the attention devoted to students demonstrating memorization of and proficiency in

reproducing curriculum content knowledge (Au, 2007; Hursh, 2007).

A final philosophical/ theoretical topic that is more highly represented in my own reviews

of literature than in either book, is the idea of equity and access to 21st century education.

Neither book acknowledges the role that economic, racial, or linguistic diversity might play as

21st century learning tools are employed. In my review of research, I have sought to find out

how 21st century competency implementation has played out in and empowered diverse

communities and how technology tools are employed with students who have English as a

Second Language (ESOL) to facilitate communication and creativity (Jacobsen-Lundenberg,

2013; Black, 2009). As schools become increasingly diverse, it will be important to understand

the ways in which 21st century learning can reach all students and communities equitably.

Instructional /Practical Topics in 21st Century Learning

Literature surrounding 21st century learning and skills can also fit within the instructional and

practical domain. This thematic domain includes topics that pertain to actual implementation

and practices as they are employed within the school setting. Instructional delivery models,

assessment practices, the professional development and support of teachers, as well as in school

leadership practices fit within this domain. Bellanca and Brandt, Kay and Greenhill, and my

own literature review have explored a multitude of these very practical concepts, but there are

some distinct differences in the ways in which these topics that are emphasized and discussed.
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 10

Bellanca and Brandt, Kay and Greenhill, and my own review have all intensively explored

the instructional strategies of problem based learning (PBL) and inquiry learning. Kay and

Greenhill have defined one of their actionable steps for developing instructional practices and

they provide artifacts, rubrics and descriptors of PBL in Focusing Your Curriculum and

Assessment (2012). John Barrell contributes a chapter in the Bellanca and Brandt text that is

devoted to the nature of the types of problems we present students with, demonstrating that PBL

is central to achieving the mission of 21st century education (Barrell, 2010). Much of my own

literature review has centered around PBL, and has explored how it can be integrated within a

curriculum (Petrosino, 2004; Vega & Brown, 2013; Bell, 2010; Summers & Dickinson, 2012;

Gijbels, Dochy, Van der Bossche, & Segers, 2005), how it works within diverse contexts

(Jacobsen-Lundenberg, 2013), and also how it affects student learning as compared to more

guided instruction (Kirschener, Sweller, & Clark, 2006). Inquiry, the process of student

discovery learning, is another instructional delivery model that is often referenced in the 21st

century literature (Kirschener, Sweller, & Clark, 2006), and is emphasized throughout the

Bellanca and Brandt text, as well as referenced throughout the Kay and Greenhill text.

Another practical consideration for 21st century learning is how to address student

assessment. The literature in the field overwhelming points to the conclusion that our current

student assessment model does not fully capture student learning outcomes (Popham, 2007), is

also largely conclusive that student generated artifacts can more fully point to the learning

outcomes that were attained (Voogt & Roblin, 2012; Kay & Greenhill, 2011; Kay & Greenhill,

2012). Kay and Greenhill stress the important of aligning assessments to the competencies

described in the P21 framework, and using rubrics, portfolios, and self-assessments to monitor

progress towards those goals (2012). They demonstrate in the Aligning your System chapter
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 11

how exemplar schools and districts around the country have worked backwards from student

outcomes to create a diverse range of rubrics and assessments (Kay & Greenhill, 2012). Douglas

Reeves chapter from the Bellanca and Brandt text, which was discussed earlier in this paper,

contributes a framework for retooling student assessments in order to align them to a more open,

non-standardized, and team based form (2010). My review of literature on student assessment is

largely congruent with these findings. In a study conducted by Supovitz and Brennan, the

researchers utilized hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) with multivariate outcomes in order to

understand the influence and predictive value of a variety of variables, including the role of

student characteristics and class and school environments on their subsequent standardized test

or portfolio assessment performance (1997). In most cases, the researchers demonstrated that the

usage of portfolio assessments did not significantly impact performance compared to

standardized testing, and while these findings demonstrate that they cant completely alleviate

the inequities present in standardized assessment, it does demonstrate that portfolio assessment

does not do any greater harm than the current system, and can actually provide educators with a

more descriptive look at students individual strengths (Supovitz & Brennan, 1997). Kay and

Greenhill have also contributed other work on the utility and efficacy of rubrics and portfolio

assessments that are integral to my understanding of creating a 21st century framework (2011).

Silva discusses several programs that have prioritized a 21st century framework and the ways in

which they approach their assessment practices (2009). For example, in River City a

technologically based virtual world is utilized to assess students through a simulated learning

program. Silva notes that the time and cost of these assessment models are notably higher than

a standard multiple choice assessment constructed to measure understanding of a given content,

21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 12

but she notes that it in relative terms for what districts pay per pupil, these assessment shifts are a

small price to pay and necessary for a new direction in education (2009).

Both technology and learning environments are represented in the texts from Bellanca and

Brandt, Kay and Greenhill, and my own research. These constructs go hand in hand, because

technology is integrated into the learning environment of a 21st century classroom. Bob Pearlman

contributes a chapter in the Bellanca and Brandt text regarding what features learning

environments contain that allow 21st century learning to flourish (2010). He explores some

exemplar schools around the country that have a variety of room sizes (small conference rooms

for group work, spaces dedicated to presentations, open/glass walled classrooms to facilitate

collaboration) as well as the types of furnishings, including tech integration, that allow 21st

century learning to take root (Pearlman, 2010). Technology is also heavily discussed in the text,

and constitutes three chapters authored by Lemke, November, and Richardson. These authors

collectively espouse the merits of getting technology in the hands of students, allowing them to

use it throughout the day for authentic purposes, and using technology in a way that enhances

learning (not just as a replacement for pen and paper) (Lemke, 2010; November, 2010;

Richardson, 2010). Kay and Greenhill talk less specifically about what learning environments

should look like and how much technology is necessary, but they do espouse the merits of a 1:1

laptop ratio for students, incorporating an open use technology policy within the school, and

focusing on digital literacy (2012). In my own review of research, I have focused on Bruce

Sheppard and Jean Browns work on the challenges of leading schools to student-focused and

technology-integrated environments (2012). While their research recognizes the strengths and

vision of creating these kinds of learning environments, they also address the very real
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 13

challenges of financial limitations and transforming teachers mindsets about technology usage

(Sheppard & Brown, 2012).

Both the Bellanca and Brandt text as well as the Kay and Greenhill text have focused on

the instructional topics of professional learning communities (PLCs) and the instructional

delivery model known as Understanding by Design (UbD) that I have thus far in my review of

literature have largely omitted within my searches. While these topics are something I have

lived daily in my professional life, their central relevance to the 21st century learning reform had

not been made apparent until now. The Kay and Greenhill text espouse how PLCs are

imperative for supporting teachers through their work and building professional capacity, the

third actionable step in their book (2012). Richard and Rebecca DuFour also contribute a

chapter on the centrality of PLCs in the Bellanca and Brandt text, and explain that teachers can

learn by doing, since collaborative team and school meetings require teachers to engage in

exactly the behaviors that they are working on instilling in their students in a 21st century reform

(2010). A chapter is also devoted entirely to the concept of UbD in the Bellanca and Brandt

book, and authors Jay McTighe and Elliott Seif explain that with new student learning outcomes

in mind for the 21st century, it is necessary to work backwards from our conceptions of what we

hope students can demonstrate through assessments and then build curriculum around those

goals (2010). This concept is interwoven in several of the actionable steps in Kay and

Greenhills book, but is heavily covered and demonstrated with artifacts from schools in their

actionable step Align Your System (2012).

While the texts have much in common when it comes to exploring instructional and practical

topics related to 21st century learning, both books explore a topic that is omitted from the other

text and not highly represented in my own literature review to date. The Kay and Greenhill text
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 14

emphasize the importance of developing ties to the community for a 21st century learning reform,

and has Create a Community Consensus as an actionable step that requires outreach to not just

teachers, staff, and students within the school, but also with parents, organizations, the school

board, and business leaders outside of the school (2012). Several outreach artifacts are included

as appendices in the text, including drafted letters and agendas for partnerships with local

businesses, as well as drafts of letters for community stakeholders such as students and parents

(Kay & Greenhill, 2012). The Bellanca and Brandt text, in contrast to Kay and Greenhill and my

own literature review, have included a chapter of research from outside of American public

schools, and describe the context and environment of the Teach Less, Learn More schools in

Singapore (Fogarty & Pete, 2010). Singapore has a rigidly aligned educational system that

allowed for this 21st century learning movement to propagate quickly through the redesign of

schools to focus on more student centered learning structures (Fogarty & Pete, 2010).

Considering that a major purpose of the 21st century learning reform is to help American students

function in a more globalized economy, it makes sense to look at the educational systems of

other countries and identify how they prepare their students for the futures and ascertain what

lessons might be gleaned from their systems.

While the previous concepts might be instructional topics that I aim to explore in the future, I

did uncover that most of the 21st century learning literature that I have reviewed to date falls

within the instructional/practical domain. I have been particularly focused on leadership visions,

teacher evaluation, professional development, and implementation processes occur within a

school. The Kay and Greenhill text appealed to me in that it outlines these as actionable steps,

and offers concrete strategies for how these practical considerations might unfold (2012). Their

steps align closely to the following researchers findings on implementation.

21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 15

Bolman and Deal assert that effective educational leadership first must establish and gain

support for a clear and concise vision (2008), but the implementation of a vision, including one

of 21st century reform, will be critical in understanding how this ideal might fully integrate into

the work of teachers. A key component of creating changes in instruction is the supervision and

evaluation of teachers (Accomplished California Teachers, 2015). The Accomplished California

Teachers group collaborated on elements that evaluation systems should include to generate a

supervision policy that holds more utility (2015). Their recommendations include linking

evaluation to actual teaching standards, the inclusion of performance assessments within the

classroom, the consideration of an array of student outcomes, frequent completion by trained

educational experts, consistent and usable feedback that directly links to professional

development, and the incorporation of the innovative practices in current use (Accomplished

California Teachers, 2015). Professional development will also serve as a key lever for

promoting a 21st century learning reform. A significant educational paradigm shift will

necessitate both leadership and teachers to participate in learning around the reform, and this

learning can be enhanced when teachers and leadership engage in professional learning together

(Robinson & Timperley, 2007). From their meta-analysis, themes of forming an educational

direction, fostering a culture of learning for continued improvement, constructive engagement in

discussing problems, and the selection and use of smart tools (resources for communication and

documentation that are utilized by a school) all were factors in successful professional

development (Robinson & Timperley, 2007).

While Kay and Greenhill and my current body of literature closely align in relation to

these implementation factors, I have been interested in an additional practical topic outside of

the scope of Kay and Greenhills text: instructional leadership. School districts that have
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 16

adopted the vision will need to have clear and strategic plans in place detailing how to

integrate these skillsets with current curricular programs and how to interact with school

instructional leaders in order to ensure the actual work of this vision is carried out (Gunn &

Hollingsworth, 2013). It will be important to understand the roles and work of multiple levels

of educational leaders as they serve as instructional leaders to successfully implement this

vision of promoting 21st century teaching and learning in the classroom (Neumerski, 2012).

Instructional leadership should play a significant role in what Kay and Greenhill define as their

last actionable step: Improve and Innovate (2012).

Political /Global Topics in 21st Century Learning

The final thematic domain that 21st century learning topics fall within is the political/global

domain. Topics within this domain show how the greater world context and political structures

shape our educational system currently and how we envision it for the future. Many of the topics

already explored in this paper also fit within this realm (comparisons of multiple 21st century

frameworks, understanding the purposes of schooling, conceptualizing student assessment, and

understanding issues related to equity and access), however there are three additional topics that

situate firmly within this thematic domain: accountability policy, understanding the global

workforce, and recognizing the effects of political instability.

My own literature review has focused on the effects of accountability policy and it has

proven be the most significant reasoning for my own purposes and directions for my research.

My understandings support the notion that while a system of accountability and standardization

has merit in allowing us one way to understand what students have learned in schools, this highly

technical-rational framework is shortsighted in terms of understanding the work being done

within schools and the holistic growth and development of children as a result of their schooling
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 17

(Supovitz, 2009). Reducing a child to a single test score cannot demonstrate values and skills the

education system provides young people; an economic perspective (Hanushek, 2009) fails to

show the inherent complexity of student learning (Desimone, 2009). The high stakes associated

with educational testing results in the unnecessary narrowing of curriculum and instruction

within schools and often fails to recognize the academic strengths of populations of students,

particularly those with special learning needs and English Language Learners (Au, 2007).

Bellanca and Brandt similarly highlight the shortcomings of accountability policy and in

particular, the interview with Linda Darling-Hammond demonstrates how rigid national and state

policies fail to capture the strengths of our students and the learning outcomes we truly hope to

instill in them (2010). Kay and Greenhill do not so much eschew the accountability policies so

much as they aim to infuse the system with more descriptive data based in multiple choice

measures that require application and critical thinking, and including more student produced

work (Kay & Greenhill, 2012).

Both books also delve in the ways that globalization effects the economy in which our

students will one day participate. Economist Thomas Friedmans work on globalization is cited

throughout the Kay and Greenhill text and his premise of a flattening world and the need to

understand how to operate in the complex and communication driven world, shapes the way Kay

and Greenhill have constructed their foci for 21st century learning implementation (2010). The

US Department of Labor Statistics offer statistics data regarding employment trends that

demonstrate students needs for 21st century readiness. While these global economic trends are

mostly emphasized in the Bellanca and Brandt text during Ken Kays foreword to the book, other

authors allude to the increasingly globalized workforce as justification for their respective

contributions.
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 18

The afterword of the Bellanca and Brandt text is written by Andy Hargreaves, and he astutely

points out that the current direction, as he denotes as the Third Way, while well intended, is

going to lack the political stability needed for it to thrive in a manner we hope that it should

(2010). Hargreaves points to other countries that lack political tension and turmoil as having

markedly more successful educational systems as they are able to continue on a single national

path, rather than ebb and flow between reforms for whichever way the political tides turn (2010).

This notion of political instability may seem somewhat inevitable to endure and insurmountable

in America, but the recognition of this impact could hold implications for some bipartisan

support for a future vision, as Hargreaves envisions in his Fourth Way (2010). While political

and global topics seem on the periphery of the educational work being done in a 21st century

learning movement, these considerations are impossible to ignore as they provide the context that

ultimately drives the purposes behinds and challenges endured in a 21st century reform.

Conclusion

James Bellanca and Ron Brandts book 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students

Learn and Ken Kay and Valerie Greenhills The Leaders Guide to 21st Century Education: 7

Steps for Schools and Districts are two texts that served to complement and challenge my

understandings of 21st century learning. In synthesizing these books with my prior knowledge,

three major thematic domains emerged that are central to understanding 21st century learning:

philosophical/theoretical topics, instructional/practical topics, as well as political/global topics.

Understanding the topics within these three domains is essential for having a holistic conception

of why the 21st century learning reform is important, what can be done to implement it in

schools, and how this movement reflexively interacts within our American and worldly contexts.

By coding the topics relevant to 21st century learning within the three domains, I have effectively
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 19

clarified my own particular research interests as well as identified gaps within the literature base

that I will work to review more literature in or potentially contribute to through my own

research. While the 21st century learning reform is appropriately complex and dynamic, the

approach holds promise in delivering our students with a relevant and authentic education that

will prepare them for success in their futures.

21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 20

References

Accomplished California Teachers. (2015). A coherent system of teacher evaluation for quality

teaching. Educational Policy Analysis Archives, 23(17), 1-22.

Au, W. (2007). High-stakes testing and curricular control: a qualitative metasynthesis.

Educational Researcher, 36, 258-267. DOI: 10.3102/0013189X07306523

Barrell, J. (2010). Problem-based learning: The foundation for 21st century skills. In J. Bellanca

& R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (175-200).

Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Bell, S. (2010). Project-based learning for the 21st century: skills for the future. Clearing House,

83, 39-4. DOI: 10.1080/00098650903505415

Bellanca, J.A. & Brandt, R.S. (2010). 21st century skills: Rethinking how students learn.

Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Black, R.W. (2009). English-language learners, fan communities, and 21st century skills. Journal

of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52, 688-687. doi:10.1598/JAAL.52.8.4.

Bolman, L. G. & Deal, T. E. (2008). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice, and leadership

(4th ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). New policies for 21st century demands/ Interviewer: J. Bellanca

[Transcript]. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How

Students Learn (77-96). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Dede, C. (2010). Comparing frameworks for 21st century skills. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt

(Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (51-76). Bloomington,

IN: Solution Tree Press.

21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 21

Desmione, L. (2009). Complementary methods for policy research. In G. Sykes, B. Schneider &

D.N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of Education Policy Research (163-175). NY: Routledge.

Dufour, R. & Dufour, R. (2010). The role of professional learning communities in advancing 21st

century skills. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How

Students Learn (77-96). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Fogarty, R. & Pete, B.M. (2010). The Singapore vision: Teach less, learn more. In J. Bellanca &

R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (97-116).

Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Gardner, H. (2010). Five minds for the future. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century

Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (9-32). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Gijbels, D., Dochy, F., Van den Bossche, P., & Segers, M. (2005). Effects of problem-based

learning: A meta-analysis from the angle of assessment. Review of Educational

Research, 75, 27-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.3102/00346543075001027

Gunn, T. & Hollingsworth, M. (2013). The implementation and assessment of shared 21st

century learning vision: A district-based approach. Journal of Research on Technology

in Education, 45(3), 201-228. DOI:10.1080/15391523.2013.10782603

Hanushek, E. A. (2009). The economic value of education and cognitive skills. In G. Sykes, B.

Schneider & D.N. Plank (Eds.), Handbook of Education Policy Research (39-56). NY:

Routledge.

Hargreaves, A. (2010). Leadership, change, and beyond the 21st century skills agenda. In J.

Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn

(327- 348). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Hursh, D. (2007). Assessing No Child Left Behind and the rise of neoliberal education
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 22

policies. American Educational Research Journal, 44(3), 493-518.

Jacobsen-Lundeberg, V. (2013). Communication, collaboration and credibility: Empowering

marginalized youth with 21st century skills. International Journal of Vocational

Education & Training, 21(2).

Kay, K. (2010). 21st century skills: Why they matter, what they are, and how we get there. In J.

Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (ix-

xxxi). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Kay, K. & Greenhill, V. (2011). Twenty-first century students need 21st century skills. In G. Wan

& D. Gut (Eds.), Bringing schools into the 21st century (pp. 41-65). Netherlands:

Springer. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0268-4_3

Kay, K. & Greenhill, V. (2012) The leaders guide to 21st century education: 7 steps for schools

and districts. New Jersey: Pearson Resources for 21st Century Learning.

Kereluik, K., Mishra, P., Fahnoe, C., & Terry, L. (2013). What knowledge is of most worth:

Teacher knowledge for 21st century learning. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher

Education, 29, 127-140. DOI: 10.1080/21532974.2013.10784716

Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R.E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction

does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based,

experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 42, 75-86. DOI:

10.1080/00461520701263368

Lemke, C. (2010). Innovation through technology. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st

Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (243- 274). Bloomington, IN:

Solution Tree Press.

21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 23

McTighe, J. & Seif, E. (2010). An implementation framework to support 21st century skills. In J.

Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn

(149-174). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Neumerski, C. (2013). Rethinking instructional leadership, a review: What do we know about

principal, teacher, and coach instructional leadership, and where should we go from here?

Educational Administration Quarterly, 49(2), 310-347.

DOI:10.1177/0013161X12456700

November, A. (2010). Technology rich, information poor. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st

Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (275-284). Bloomington, IN:

Solution Tree Press.

Pearlman, B. (2010). Designing new learning environments to support 21st century skills. In J.

Bellanca & R. Brandt (Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn

(117-148). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Petrosino, A. (2004). Integrating curriculum, instruction, and assessment in project-based

instruction: a case study of an experienced teacher. Journal of Science Education and

Technology, 13, 447-460. DOI: 1059-0145/04/1200-0447/0

Popham. W.J. (2007). Instructional insensitivity of tests: Accountabilitys dire drawback. The

Phi Delta Kappan, 89(2), 146-155.

Reeves, D. (2010). A framework for assessing 21st century skills. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt

(Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (305-326). Bloomington,

IN: Solution Tree Press.

Resnick, D. (1980). Minimum competency testing historically considered. Review of Research

in Education, 8, 3-29.
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 24

Richardson, W. (2010). Navigating social networks as learning tools. In J. Bellanca & R. Brandt

(Eds.), 21st Century Skills: Rethinking How Students Learn (285-304). Bloomington,

IN: Solution Tree Press.

Robinson, V. & Timperley, H. (2007). The leadership of the improvement of teaching and

learning: Lessons from initiatives with positive outcomes for students. Australian Journal

of Education, 51, 247-262.

Sheppard, B. & Brown, J. (2012). Leadership for a new vision of public school classrooms:

Technology-smart and learner-centered. Journal of Educational Administration, 52, 84-

96.

Silva, E. (2009). Measuring skills for 21st-century learning. The Phi Delta Kappan, 90, 630-634.

doi: 10.1177/003172170909000905

Summers, E. & Dickinson, G. (2012) A longitudinal investigation of project-based instruction

and student achievement in high school social studies. Interdisciplinary Journal of

Problem-based Learning, 6(1).

Supovitz, J. (2009). Can high stakes testing leverage educational improvement? Prospects from

the last decade of testing and accountability reform. Journal of Educational Change, 10,

211-227.

Supovitz, J.A. & Brennan, R.T. (1997). Mirror, mirror on the wall, which is the fairest test of

all?: An examination of the equitability of portfolio assessment relative to standardized

tests. Harvard Educational Review, 67(3), 472- 506.

Thomas, J. & Brady, K. (2005). The Elementary Education Act at 40: Equity, accountability, and

the evolving federal role in public education. Review of Research in Education, 29, 51-

67.
21ST CENTURY SYNTHESIS 25

Vega, A. & Brown, C. (2013). The implementation of project-based learning. National Forum of

Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 30(2), 4-29.

Voogt, J. & Roblin, N. (2010). 21st century skills. (Discussion paper). Enschede, NL: University

of Twente. Retrieved October 11, 2015, from

http://archief.kennisnet.nl/fileadmin/contentelementen/kennisnet/Bestanden_Feddo/21st-

Century-Skills.pdf

Voogt, J. & Roblin, N. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st

century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of

Curriculum Studies, 44(3), 299-321. DOI:10.1080/00220272.2012.668938