Slashdot Mirror
The Cyberlearning Technologies Transforming Education
aarondubrow writes: The National Science Foundation funds basic cyberlearning research and since 2011 has awarded roughly 170 grants, totaling more than $120 million, to EdTech research projects around the country. However, NSF's approach to cyber-learning has been different from other public, private and philanthropic efforts. NSF funds compelling ideas, helps rigorously test them and then assists in transitioning the best ideas from research to practice. This article describes several examples of leading cyberlearning projects, from artificial intelligence to augmented reality, that are transforming education.
For those who can't remember this far back, we have the National Science Foundation to thank for CORE-Plus, SIMMS, The Interactive Mathematics Program, and the Connected Mathematics Project, along with other curricula otherwise known as "Leftist Math" that really caught on in the late 90's. While their intentions were good, and their involvement in creating new math programs helped reshape much needed reforms in how mathematics was taught, the programs pushed the pendulum too far in the opposite direction. (I'm speaking as a mathematics teacher who instructed students in CORE-Plus and CMP.)
As much as I am frustrated with the current methods of "integrating" technology into classrooms, given their past track record, I'm skeptical as to how the NSF can improve it.
Not that women's lib is a bad thing but before women could get any job they were qualified for many were limited and selected teaching. This means that millions of women that were smart enough to be doctors, lawyers, scientists, or engineers were teachers instead. Now it seems like most teachers are C students at best.
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
I've worked on this tech before, it was fun, but the money's too lousy.
The purpose of existence is to make money.
And the majority of teachers are still women, so what is your point? It can't have anything to do with women's liberation, and seems to be an empty rant about nothing. Call me a skeptic, but you don't seem to have an impressive amount of knowledge about either women's lib or the public education problems.
Hard to believe that teaching isn't an attractive option for a lot of people. What with the mediocre pay, constant and draining self-policing, self-righteous parents who always know better, and general contempt from large sections of society.
"This child is the most precious thing in the world to me. I want you to not only educate, but babysit, exercise, discipline, and ensure a dietary regime. There are about 25 of us who feel the same way. And we all believe our child is the chosen one the legends speak of, incapable of wrongdoing. But we don't really think you deserve to be paid all that well, because it's not like you're doing something important, like developing a photo sharing app."
Displacement of teachers is already under way. One student I talked to has already had two of his five courses being taught by computer alone. Testing is done by an automated process as well. using cams and what amounts to security guards one guard can now control four or more class rooms at the high school level. And it comes back to the same thing. One seventh grade American history teacher could teach that class for the entire nation. At some point the kids will shift into computer at home education if it is a stable, two parent home. So not only will teachers become more and more absent but schools will have to be closed as the number of students needing an in school education will shrink. I expect a lot of strife and some sort of class warfare over the education issue.
NSF's approach to cyber-learning seems to be mostly about pushing the current administration's agenda. Look at the projects - monitoring pollution, cross cultural training, environmental awareness, teaching girls to program, etc.
Those are reasonable subjects to be discussed in a classroom, but I'd prefer to see the projects identified for what they are rather than being funded as cyber-learning research.
I followed the link to the article titled "several examples of cyberlearning projects" and had to cringe. Everything on that page either was or could have been from the 1980's. There was an Apple 2GS, Johnny 5, games with awful graphics, etc.
This is exactly the problem with e-learning. Most of the offerings are crap.
Seriously, let's think about what particular kind of subhuman moron would come up with a word like that.
First, we have the "cyber" prefix, which is a reliable indicator that the person using it knows nothing about computers, computing, networks, electronics, software, math, or, well, much of anything. This was popularized by know-nothing Beltway blowhards.
Then we have the idiotic use of "learning" to mean teaching. This one comes from useless corporate drones.
These are not two great tastes that taste great together. The word by itself tells you all you need to know about the value of any program they come up with.
The 12 Weeks of UNPAID vacation a year.
The right to take home piles of student papers to grade long into the evening. After which you get to
do lesson planning.
The healthplans that are no better then most anyone can get now that ObamaCare is in place.
The chance to be fired because the whole class was getting over the flu on the day that
the standardized tests were being administered.
Huff Post. That was all you needed to know.
...being shit upon by every conserva-tard whose television told them to get angry about public education. After all, if you had any real skills you'd be a CEO somewhere (or at least in management).