Do you think that there's an intelligent curriculum choice that would make sense in the context of iPods and the like? Do you think it'd be worth the cost, not only of the iPods, but of the deployment, podcast materials, etc.?Originally Posted by Jethro34
My sense is "no", but I'm unsure if the problem is thinking too big (start with fundamentals, reliable power out the walls, deploying ubiquitous networking) or too little (a radical IT revolution -- kids with headphones on in front of computers that spew lessons all day, teachers supplementing computers, podcasts with subliminals for sleeptime learning -- turn that 21st century electronic babysitter into your teaching bitch). The implications of a complex external tool you have to have for a general-purpose curriculum haven't really been thought out, and those sort of choices widen the divide big-time.
My instinct is to agree, here.Here's a novel idea, help make sure schools have things like, oh, chairs and desks before putting another distraction in a kids hands. How about keeping teachers around as well. Maybe classes with fewer than 40 students in them would help kids learn better.
But... is students per teacher the real problem, or some other dynamic? My gut feeling is that attention span is the real killer. I don't think kids attention span improves at 15:1 vs. 40:1. Perhaps most classes shouldn't be more than a half hour, tops. Beyond that, you're fighting for attention span, and there's much peer pressure to not prolong things. Think of the times you didn't raise your hand with questions at the end because you didn't want to hold up the rest of the class, or look stupid. Maybe that 40:1 ratio CAN work, but only in short bursts and supplemented with a lot more "office hours" time so 1-on-1 and small groups meet with the teacher (either at the teacher or student's initiative) during hours. Maybe teachers need to swap lessons every once in awhile, when possible, to keep things fresh. Sesame Street wouldn't do well if they just showed lovable furry old Grover, even if he's lovable.
My problem with this is that it's the teachers who taught the legislators, and the teachers who collectively marginalize themselves when they're not being marginalized by others. And, to take a quote of yours slightly out of order:If teachers could replace legislators for a few weeks our state would be much better off.
"I'm all for a tax hike" is a marginalizing position -- "take more of me" versus "take less of me". Teachers are used to sacrificing for the good of the flock, because the choice to be a professional K-12 teacher at all typically involves big sacrifice. That's increasingly out of fashion in a world where people do lots of shit now that future generations will have to deal with, where the idea of "what's good for the children" takes a distant second place to "me me me". Look at how unions were marginalized. By far the most effective tactic was to keep current union members as fat cats, while penalizing would-be future union members.I'm all for a tax hike, but use it to fund a better education in someway besides iPods.
Ok, enough rambling...
Bookmarks