https://news.slashdot.org/story/18/12/28/0153201/beware-silicon-valleys-gifts-to-our-schools
An inconvenient truth? What do you think?
Thanks for sharing Visvanath,
I think it's the same old story, all over again:
- EdTech is not a teacher,
- EdTech is not a pedagogy,
- EdTech is a tool that can help teachers to implement a particular pedagogy,
- Learning outcomes depend more upon the quality of teaching & efficacy of the pedagogy than upon the tools being used.
The contribution of EdTech to learning outcomes is small but significant so we should take care in selecting the most appropriate tools & media for the learners, learning objectives, the context of learning, & the subject matter. This also applies to face-to-face, non-EdTech instruction. After all, print, pencils, & paper were once new technologies too.
AFAIK, nobody has been able to show that elearning is cheaper or less labour intensive than face-to-face instruction of the same quality.
From what I can tell, the Silicon Valley billionaires behind pushing tech into education have little or no background in education, epistemology, or the learning sciences. It seems to be a very expensive (to the tax payer) example of hubris to suppose that they can teach our children better than some of the best performing education systems in the world (Even the USA ranks highly if we control for poverty).
Image courtesy of Lawrie Phipps.
Seriously: Thanks for the reminder. You are right, it is the same old story. I wake up every couple of months to report something "subversive" (the last one being, "From screen to brain, some bad news" https://moodle.org/mod/forum/discuss.php?d=374292). This time, I happen to listen to Prof. Manfred Spitzer (of Digital Dementia fame), who brings tons of data against the screen at young age and then I read this /. article that there is no proof of the alleged positive effects of the screen in learning. What are we doing?
P.S. For those who don't know him, Prof. Spitzer is German, an unusual German in his emotions. He is very much reserved/careful in English, for obvious reasons, which is still a pity. Here's an example for the English speaker: "Talking Germany: Manfred Spitzer, Neuroscientist" https://www.youtube.com/watch?foo=bar&v=4Ueg55KUQa0.
Back to your summary:
> ...
> EdTech is a tool that can help teachers to implement a particular pedagogy,
> Learning outcomes depend more upon the quality of teaching & efficacy of the pedagogy than upon the tools being used.
> ...
> From what I can tell, the Silicon Valley billionaires behind pushing tech into education have little or no background in education, epistemology, or the learning sciences. It seems to be a very expensive (to the tax payer) example of hubris to suppose that they can teach our children better than some of the best performing education systems in the world (Even the USA ranks highly if we control for poverty).
That simple? The new industry pushing their products, saying that the education is now digital? A long supply chain interested in its cut? I can't believe, there must be more to it? Need time to digest this. Yep, the holidays give ample occasion.
BTW, never underestimate the /. pack. How about this comment: https://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=13130466&threshold=1&commentsort=0&mode=thread&cid=57868970 ?
I recommend the writing of Audrey Watters
Many thanks for the link. Yes, great writing!
Isn't it ironical though that the articles http://hackeducation.com/ are going to come out in book form?
@all
Haven't seen this mentioned in moodle.org(?):
Education Disrupted
How Google Took Over the Classroom
The tech giant is transforming public education with low-cost laptops and free apps. But schools may be giving Google more than they are getting.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/13/technology/google-education-chromebooks-schools.html