Computers , IT & the WWW - A great opportunity being wasted??

[guestgulkan]

Here in the UK, I remember some decades ago, there some some hoopla amongst the powers that be, about how great TV would be as an educational tool.
Since then, nothing has happened. TV has degenerated into an almost total commercial media.
Any really good eduactional programs are aired in the early hours of the morning. What good is this?

I see the same thing happening with computers, IT and the WWW.
There is a lot of talk from our politicians about the educational use of these mediums, but I see no real resources, (money, equipment & time) being used to rectify this.

Where does the responsibility for this fiasco ultimately lie?

 

[CajunCenturion]

I think we must first realize that neither TV, nor the web were invented/created for educational purposes. It became apparent that there were educational opportunites with both of these media, but its not necessarily anyone's responsibility to fulfill that educational potential. These are both communications media, not educational media.

As far as where does the "responsibility for this fiasco" lie, I would ask, who has the obligation to develop and invest in the web and/or TV for educational purposes? Since neither were developed for education, then you can't blame anyone for not using for education.

I further question that this situation is a fiasco. I know that my children have done quite of bit of research for high school projects and term papers using the web. They don't have a clue on how to use a card catalog - but they can find what they need using Google.

The web is not an educational medium, it is not, nor should it ever be, a surrogate for good face-to-face classroom instruction. It is a communications medium making more information more readily available to both teachers and students. Most school libraries (at least in my region) have PC's with internet connections. The library has substationally increased information access at a fraction of the cost of new books and reference materials.

IMHO, this is not a fiasco, and as such, I don't blame anyone for it.

The fiasco, is the amount of pure garbage and trash that now pervade the web. The fiasco is having parry the inappropriate influence of questionable material, and he need to filter out the defecation to get to the desired data. Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[edfair]

It is more a failure of the users to use it properly. Build a better screwdriver and somebody will break it using it for a prybar.

Nothing to stop teachers or parents from taping the good stuff and using it when they need it. At the current price of tape the major problem will be storage space. But it will require some discipline and some thought and both are in short supply in the world these days.

The web has another problem. Anybody can publish there,and sorting the trash out is the biggest problem. Ed Fair
unixstuff@juno.com
Any advice I give is my best judgement based on my interpretation of the facts you supply. Help increase my knowledge by providing some feedback, good or bad, on any advice I have given.

 

[Kjonnnn]

TV programs are designed to attractive a large number of viewers and thus attract advertisers and sponsors who are willing to pay big bucks for the exposure. Unless the viewing public supports (by a Nielson showing) "educational" offerings... you won't see sponsors offering up the big bucks that TV wants and needs.

The internet has a lot more educational options available in the form of websites. But like any other tool... you have to know how to use it.

 

[guestgulkan]

Surely the government (certainly in the UK, and probably in most other contries too) has the responsibility to ensure that adequate resources (enough teachers of good quality, educational tools, etc..) are made available to the Educational system.

By government, I mean the appointed secretary of state for education, and other memebers of the educational governing body.

I would not like to get coorporations too involved, otherwise you could end up with a mass marketing venture with companies pushing their own self interests at the expense of education.

I find that, great sums of money & time are being spent on issues such as multi-culturalism, multi-religion, sex/race equality issues.
I totally agree with this, but computers,IT and the

http://WWW will

have just as big - if not a bigger impact- on society in the future.

 

[CajunCenturion]

guestgulkan - I like your idea and would like to pursue it further.

There are three area which I'm curious as to how you'd propose dealing with:

1 - Content Management - How do you control what content you want to make available to what audience, keeping in mind, grade and nationality?

2 - Access Management - How do you insure that only the desired content is accessible?

3 - Delivery Management - How do you insure that the content that you do make available, is actually delivered to the target audience?
Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[SteveTheGeek]

Why does the government have a responsibility to ensure that adequate resources are made available to the educational system? Those are my resources you're bandying around, and not having any children of my own, I'm not necessarily willing to spend money on the education of children for which I have no responsibility.

As for corporations, it would seem like they have the best incentive of all - education generally leads to wealth which feeds consumption of the corporation's products, aside from developing a larger pool of new talent from which to draw employees.
-Steve

 

[PerryMc]

Can't agree with you on the Corporations having the best incentive of all, Steve. The amount of poor quality goods and outright crap produced these days requires a hefty percentage of the population to be ignorant and minimally educated so they will buy it. Most well-educated people tend to be more discerning and as you say, have the wealth to buy quality.

Education needs to start at a VERY early age and it needs to be FUN, so that people get in the habit of learning and take pleasure in expanding their knowledge. TV and the

http://WWW have

untold potential for that but I don't see the Corporations striving for the long term benefit of Society instead of short-term benefits to their bottom-line.

Smile anyway,
Perry.

 

[LesleyW]

Like you Steve I do not have children but we, the childless, still have a vested interest in today's childrens' education. If they are not educated and capable of independent innovative thought, who is going to support the infrastructure when you and I are retired? Who is going to fix your central heating, build the roads/houses/hospitals, who is going to staff those hospitals? Today's children, that's who!

 

[guestgulkan]

-> Cajun
In answer to your questions.
I see 2 aspects to the computers/IT/

http://www scenario.

(a) The teaching of the use of computers/IT/

http://WWW and

(b) the use ofcomputers/IT/

http://WWW as

an aid to teachers/students.

With regard to point (b):

1. Content
The educational circulum/syllabus is already predefined.
I assume for a particular subject, this details the aims of the subject. what needs to covered, testing procedures.
The IT related content would also reflect these requiements.

There are a lot of programs on cable and satellite channels (such as the national geographic, discovery, and other channels) which are very educational, and can be used to complement book based learning.
I caanot see why some of these cannot be made directly available to the educational system either asis or with some creative editing. These are done in a very entertaining manner.

2. Accessibility & Implementation
For implementation I envisage a 3 level system.
At the top level, a 'few' very high capacity, very high throughput systems.

Below that, the authorities responsible for a given local geographical area (local authorities).

below that, there will be the schools themselves (and I will put local public libraries at this level as well).

This will be a closed loop (virtual) private network.
It will only be accessed from centres of education.
[If a student wishes to access from his/her home pc, then a piece of freebie front end software is given. This will only be good for access to the education network].

Etc, etc..

3. Delivery Management
I think delivery management should be down to the individual teachers/lesson planners.
The schools in a given area would have been made aware of what resources are available by their Local Authority, who in turn have been informed by the educational governing body.

It would be up to the teacher, to chose what he/she consider the best resource to help with a particular lesson.


----------------------------
QED ??

 

[SteveTheGeek]

LesleyW,
True, today's kids are tomorrow's nursing home staff *grin* but as a parent I would insist upon having complete control over my children's education, and if the public is paying for the education, doesn't the public then determine the content? While I obviously want to keep most of the money that the government is currently taking, I also feel that parents are primarily responsible for both providing AND choosing the education that their children receive.
-Steve

 

[CajunCenturion]

guestgulkan - With regards to content - I think you're correct, the curricula are pre-defined, but they are established at local levels - not at national levels. To some degree, individual schools do have some latitude. Bottom line is that this leads to a coordination issue to built content that is complimentary to the wide myriad of curricula.

The VPN issue sounds good, although system administration could be problematic and costly considering the needs of the individual schools, up the chain to the national level. But nonetheless doable, would it be cost-effective.

On the subject of delivery - you've really answered your own question.

"I think delivery management should be down to the individual teachers/lesson planners.
The schools in a given area would have been made aware of what resources are available by their Local Authority, who in turn have been informed by the educational governing body. It would be up to the teacher, to chose what he/she consider the best resource to help with a particular lesson."

This is exactly what does exist today in many many schools. If what we have today is in your word a fiasco, then its still a fiasco.

We would have spent a greal deal of public tax-payer monies to coordinate curricula with content, establish sites and databases to make the content available, built a large scale VPN and provided for its administration. And at the end of the day - nothing has changed - its still up to the individual teacher to decide what they want to introduce into their classroom. Parents, school administrators, and government leaders has no way to insure that our children receive a return on the investment.

I'm sorry, but if this were to happen, then we really would have a fiasco on our hands. Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[guestgulkan]

So much pie in the sky anyway.
It would probably be a great exercise in how to waste tax payers money.

By the time most students are @14.5 years old, they already know all the Reading, (W)riting and (A)rithmetic skill they will use
in their remaining lives.
Given that the UK minimum school leaving age is 16, then maybe the remaining 1 - 1.5 years should be spent teaching them things like:

1. Their legal and judicial rights
2.Their rights as a consumer.
3. Their social rights (healthcare system, further adult education etc)
4. Finiancial know how (tax, banks, stocks & shares, etc)

etc.. ect..

 

[CajunCenturion]

Unfortunately, guestgulkan, you are quite correct. Its sad and it would be nice to change that. Good Luck
--------------
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[AIXSPadmin]

Television studios air programming that makes them money. Period. If people don't like what is shown they won't watch it. Period. If what is shown is what people watch, even though it is the most innane and stupid malarky ever shown on TV (such as, reality shows) then stations air it because they can advertise and charge high rates. Period.

Educational shows if people wanted to watch them would air on prime time and they would make money for the stations. But people don't want to watch a documentary on prime numbers. Thnakfully

This is the same for any medium, not just television. Look at Christina Aguilara (correct spelling?) and her new video, "Dirrty" (yes, 2 'Rs') and her posing on "Rolling Stone." She says that this new "look" is the real her and that she is comfortable in her skin. That may be true, however, I suspect that the real motivation for it is marketing. This ups her visibility and is free publicity. It also separates her in a way from Britney Spears whom she is always compared to and was always second fiddle. I don't see Britney doing what Christina is doing, and thus, Christina will have her own market niche. If people don't like her "look" or songs they won't buy it and she wouldn't be "like that."

Same as for any commercial interest. Of course, you can say that marketers and companies like televison and the movies are becoming a moral abyss, however, just like a Packard or Delorean car, they may have been better, but people didn't want them and didn't buy them. Same as for anything else commercial. There have been thousands and thousands of products introduced that have not been accepted by the public and thus have not survived.

So is it marketing making the people buy Christina's CDs and listen to her "Dirrty" song? Or is she recording it because that is what people want?

I suspect the latter! Period.