The question is not whether, but how ICT can be useful in education Comments

Ron Canuel

Thu, 7 Jun 2012 14:02:14 +0000

I regularly check this site to see how the "debate" about ICT is going. And, whew, much to my "comfort", it remains well anchored in the circular mode. And while the debate "rages", children are using technology more and more in their lives, so given the old and stale, old public education structures (aka schools), so much learning is happening outside of schools. When oh When will folks finally come to the realization that we have entered a new phase and reality, when research of ICT in Ed is discussed: "We know it works in practice, but does it work in theory?" This is my answer now to researchers and simply tell them, "Please go visit a classroom where the teachers have done a good job of integrating the technology into the classroom and tell them that according to research, there is nothing really happening." Alfred Jarry, the great French satirical playwright would have a field day on this one. We need to move on folks to developing concerted, coherent actions plans to support our teachers and help them create new learning environments, this in conjunction with students. Now that is one area that technology has made a huge difference: It now includes the voice of students in the design of learning and teaching environments. Some adults are having a tougher time on this element right now.

Darren Hayes

Fri, 13 Apr 2012 20:06:36 +0000

I feel as if some of the old methods are outdated. I spend tons of money on college and then i go there just to go to my computer and learn what im supposed to. Its almost as if the classroom is just a form of mission administration! Learn this, come back and take a test this day, and im going to waste your time while you do it. Look at khan academy. I learned everything from there.

Dennis Onyango

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 08:43:47 +0000

This is more realistic than the latter posts.

Dennis Onyango

Fri, 25 Feb 2011 08:12:46 +0000

You have no idea what you are talking about may a tour around Africa would do you some good. Video Conferencing is a far fetched reality. How about we start with the basics a pen, a book and a desk to write on!

robvanson

Fri, 11 Feb 2011 09:48:03 +0000

First, I think we mostly agree. I most certainly would not want to state that Technology is always the solution. But more, that tools help people do their work. So, if there is a shortage of people to do the work, it is common practice to try to improve productivity with technology. So, in this respect I see the educational problems as a labor shortage problem that might be alleviated by the introduction of technology and tools. I write "alleviated", not solved. And I do not have a particular preference for certain technologies. My all time favorite educational technology is the blackboard. I am all for the training of teachers, because that is the other route to higher productivity. But (re-)training of teachers has even more logistic problems than the introduction of technology. And we are already short of teachers. Who will train the teachers? I have explained my thoughts on these logistic problems of recruiting and training teachers in my February post on ETD. On your second point. I introduced a more "neutral" terminology of Spartan and Athenian education to avoid the politicized polemics between "Constructivism" vs "Traditional" education. And, really, these ideas are as old as education itself. When translated to the developing world, I see the problems mostly as a result of over-crowding and under-training of teachers. The teachers in these schools simply lack the time and means to apply methods targeted at individual students. And as they have never been able to apply such methods, they also lack the training and experience to do so. I think that to introduce more "modern" (or classical) teaching methods in the developing world it is necessary to first give the teachers the time and means to do so. In front of a class with 60 children and no textbooks or other teaching materials, how much room is there for "Constructivist" education? How about trying to carve up a little room for such education by supplying textbooks and teaching materials. And if we could introduce something, anything, that would allow the teachers to get one part of the group busy with learning or exercising without the teacher's constant supervision, then she could give more personal attention to the others. You could do that by hiring low-trained class supervisors that simply help the children with prescribed drill practice. And you could do that with some kind of technology, like cardboard models, or ICT gadgets. My point is that without carving out a little space for the teacher to attend to individual pupils, there will not be much Constructivist teaching.

Kentaro_Toyama

Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:31:27 +0000

First, I'm not at all pessimistic about the possibility of improving education. Children are not "lost" unless we give up on education entirely. But, I disagree that the best way to do so is to focus on technology when improving teachers and administrations (and engaging with parents) is far more important. There is a cost trade-off, because the resources allocated to technology could easily be allocated towards teacher training or more teachers. It's a little strange to imply that if we don't use ICTs, the children are lost! Were all of us lost before ICTs? Second, I actually believe very much in a constructivist view of education, but in the sense of learning happening when a person cognitively recreates the thing being learned. Learning is an active, rather than a passive process, yes, but good teachers are still critical, and there's no more guarantee of good active learning on PCs than there is of good active learning in a sandbox.

Kentaro_Toyama

Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:31:14 +0000

Rob, I agree with you that once someone decides that ICT of any kind -- television, radio, PC, mobile phone -- are to be used in education , it's important to focus on how best to use it. Our disagreement is in fact on the point of "whether," rather than "how." You're sure that it's always "yes," while I believe that there are plenty of instances where "no" is a better response. That's a disagreement we're not likely to resolve, so let's move on... Two misperceptions of my view that I'd like to correct are below...

@callaurrea

Tue, 1 Feb 2011 16:23:55 +0000

James, you are thinking education is equal as teaching, and you are ignoring one of the most important elements (if not the most important), which learning by the students. Do you think the poor will be able to overcome their situation and even have the opportunities others have with the educational system you are describing? I am afraid not! I would challenge people to think about other solutions that really give opportunities to children in developing countries.

robvanson

Tue, 1 Feb 2011 08:31:29 +0000

Videoconferencing is great. It would be a new kind of Australia's School of the Air http://www.australiangeographic.com.au/journal/au.... http://www.cultureandrecreation.gov.au/articles/s.... http://www.hreoc.gov.au/human_rights/rural_educat.... But if you can have the required bandwidth connected into the schools, much more things can be done. And for education, you still want only a classroom of students (~30) per teacher.

James

Mon, 31 Jan 2011 15:48:17 +0000

I believe Video conferencing is the answer to teaching in poorer countries. Think of it, we could have one teacher and a computer screen in every class throughout the country. This would then allow one teacher to teach thousands of students. This would cut back costs since we would only need to employ one teacher rather than one hundred teachers thus making education available to those who normally would not be able to afford it. Yes the presence of a teacher in the classroom would obviously provide a better teaching environment but I think that the poor who cannot afford an orthodox education would very much appreciate this alternative solution. How can technology be used to improve education?? with video conferencing.

robvanson

Wed, 26 Jan 2011 06:46:04 +0000

Yama, As I already wrote, all the hard problems of humanity are social problems. Technological problems are easy. Any solution that would require society to change, e.g., change power distribution, is very, very, likely to fail. We cannot wish for other parents, children, and teachers. We will have to do with those that are there. I know that the best fitting, natural if you want, approach to education are apprenticeships and personal tutors. The closest we have to that approach to formal education is the Oxford university model. Everybody knows that, but we also know why that won't work: There are not enough tutors to teach all the children. While we wait for utopia to come, we should help the children going to school now. So what can we do until we have all those highly qualified and motivated teachers? Help the children in class now to learn more. The next question is to look what we can do to help the teachers teach and children to learn. And frankly, I see no option but to recruit technology in some form. But the search for solutions does not have to be limited to giving every child a computer and an Internet broadband connection. And most certainly, technology should not be limited to the classroom.

Wayan

Tue, 25 Jan 2011 20:23:14 +0000

Yama,

I fear you speak of some fantasy future state of education when you talk about individualized education for all. Yes, technology could play a role, and yes, this would be the best possible process to educate our youth, but it will never, ever happen. Or not in our lifetimes, anyway. The closest I've heard to this is Teachermate, which helps increase the uniqueness of instruction on a large scale, but cannot make the true individualized instruction you seem to speak of. That would require a massive investment in new teachers, which Rob debunked in an earlier comment.

So we are left with some sub-optimal mix of teachers, technology, and to a great extent, homogenized educational experiences. From this, I can agree with you - we will only get random serendipity, which is why I so dislike the individualized story of child + laptop + miracle = education, especially that third, undefined step.

@Yamaplos

Tue, 25 Jan 2011 16:35:42 +0000

Hmm, Sparta vs. Athens? Whay about Ionian vs. Socratic, à la Piersig? One of the most frustrating things I find in this kind of debates is the aprioristic Aristotelians that happily affirm what /should be true/: obviously ICTs are good for education, since educated people tend to be surrounded by ICT, and modern science, technology, progress are so utterly linked to ICTs. This, when the /facts/ show all over that there is no direct one-way causality. Now, good old evidence-based decision making is something hard to swallow, when that evidence is that, to quote this post, "in general, it is true that an externally supplied solution only works if it can be integrated in the life of those who receive it.", and integrating is SO expensive, hard, and needs to wake up from what we wish to what we should... Anyway, here's today's answer to your "how?": by random serendipity. As long as "education" is a one-size-fits-all, it will "fail" and "succeed" in unexplained, random ways. The true jump forward in education, and very much in ICT4E, happens when the uniqueness of creation that is present in every kid is no longer an inconvenience, but something that strategies for implementation take into account. The "constructi*ist" approach has the honor of almost touching this possibility, but as long as it is disconnected and in denial of reality, and in an environment where hierarchy and seniority is the basis of knowledge, as is the ways of the ivory tower all over, we have no chance to move forward to give a chance to those who need it, except, of course, by random serendipity...