Mal Education - System Design - Should Be VS Is

Suppose we look at altering the status quo. (This will be very difficult for those heavily invested in the way things are.) If we were to reinvent education today, with present technology, would we adopt the methods developed before the birth of Christ?

I doubt it. I think we would maximize the use of modern technology to more effectively educate our kids.

We see many symptoms of a broken educational paradigm. Teachers with jobs for life and no performance reviews. Bullying of students. Mal-educated graduates. Teacher - student abuse. Resistance to measuring outcomes. Rising expulsions. Etc. Isn't it time we reassessed our assembly line, Model-T approach to the educational system?

For example, instead of 100 teachers in 100 schools spending their time presenting the same curriculum year after year, why not have the best presentation of that curriculum recorded and made universally accessible to students around the world - a la Khan Academy? Students beyond grade 6 could self-educate themselves on their own schedule. Teachers could use their considerable skills to become learning coaches, assisting each individual pupil as necessary, to reach their potential.

What if we were to invest in development of fun-to-play computer games that required students to learn reading, math and sciences as an integral part of the process? My six year old grandson knows a lot about World War II and European history, effortlessly learned on a PS3 video game.

What if we developed internet based courseware that continuously assessed how well the student was progressing and interactively adjusted the presentation and content to suit the learning style of the individual? Think that would improve the cost and effectiveness of the educational system?

PS: These ideas are not new similar suggestions were proposed in 1988 by the editor of Analog magazine.

<b>[shando] "I think we would maximize the use of modern technology to more effectively educate our kids. "</b>

What if it was illegal to do that? Or almost illegal. You can't do it unless you get the permission of the monopoly.

There are way to get around the rules, within certain limits. But you have to know that it is necessary.

<ul>Sort of like delivering mail for less than the Post Office. To this very day people are arested (and occasionally jailed) each year because they did not know it's illegal to do this.
</ul>And your customers still have to pay the monopoly.

You mention a number of 'what ifs'. They are good ideas, and some of us ought to give them a try. But the rules of crony capitalism and crony socialism conspire to make that difficult.

<b>[shando] "Teachers with jobs for life and no performance reviews. Bullying of students. Mal-educated graduates. Teacher - student abuse. Resistance to measuring outcomes. Rising expulsions. Etc. Isn't it time we reassessed our assembly line, Model-T approach to the educational system?"</b>

Like Jim says, the system is designed to manufacture replacement parts. (But then later adjusted so that it is not very good at doing this.)

We can all see it isn't doing what it SHOULD do. (Most of us.)

We can all see what it ought to do. (Most of us.)

***

There are a number of non-educational products that in fact do a very good job of educating. Like your son's games.

It ought to be 'child's play' to morph products like that into real educational tools. But the politicians and their cronies stand in the way.

How do we fix this mess?

Wiki-U anyone?

One could argue that it already exists.

Those of us who have always been <b>self-educators</b> are already taking advantage of it. And of the large variety of other unofficial educational resources available. The rise of the 'net has certainly expanded the range and the number of such resources.

And yet - education in general is still decaying into a putrid pile of puss.

WTF?

OMG, the moderator is becoming immoderate: what to do? what to do?

<b>[shando] "... what to do? what to do?"</b>

Well, I was kind of hoping for a question or comment (pro or con). About my comments about your comment. You know, keep the discussion going.

Note that my emotional expression was limited to the implication of 'bad' words, rather than the use of 'bad' words. Personally I don't understand why some people object to 'bad' words. (Words are words?) But they do. And I have to live with them.

So ... I make concessions. And so will you.

LB