On Friday 01 Jul 2011 09:20:05 Binand Sethumadhavan wrote:
2011/6/30 Rony gnulinuxist@gmail.com:
It is still young and what happened in the US is now happening here with the same players amongst the rest. What I feel individually is that these are high end presentation products meant for corporate offices and not for schools, that too in every classroom. Simply calling them teaching aids does not change things. We don't even have the entire syllabus of every class and subject available fully in professional and electronic format. If schools want to go digital then a simple projector and computer in every class or in a special room is sufficient. Schools must invest in professional grade content not gadgets.
In another place, another day I'll take offense on the suggestion that the US leads, and we follow.
As JTD explained, these "high end presentation products" allow the students to be part of the learning experience, as opposed to being detached observers. I mentioned in a previous email that I sat through a class where an IWB was in use - the kids were having fun with it, while also learning about seasons and seasonal changes around the world. It was an eye-opening experience. I suggest you too try to sit in a class where an IWB is used properly.
As far as electronic syllabus goes, a simple Google search throws these links up:
CBSE: http://cbse.nic.in/currisyllabus.htm ICSE: http://www.cisce.org/SyllabusFor_ICSE2011.html Maharashtra: http://msbshse.ac.in/newsite/newhome.html
so I don't really understand what you meant when you said syllabi are not available in electronic format.
A simple projector and computer becomes the original problem - that teachers then will have to create presentations. An IWB combines a lot of things: a regular blackboard with the capability to remember, a vast library including wikipedia, an arts room and so on.
The problem is that the above does not change the power structure - teacher handing down gyan. Learning is about 1) Putting the kids in charge 2) Converting ALL content to a local context.
The above whiteboard example, seems good because it assumes that the existing hierarchy is fine. Indeed it is a lot better than a classroom without the whiteboard. But that paradigm misses the central point, which is inverting the knowledge pyramid.
At this point we have lots and lots of tinkering with an essentially dead model of mass education. Computers and the internet have effectively shredded the knowledge delivery mechanism. And the explosion in knowledge generation has shredded the mass education method of throw some facts in the air and test retention every 6 months. ICT is merely applying "thook patti" to this model.