Good job: 60,000 teachers computer trained

[RV Pundit]

I think you are yet to fully grasp and appreciate what kind of revolutionary change we are on to. Kids and adults in the future may benefit more from online or virtual interraction that right now. That curriculum need to change...

As for priority...if we had all the money..I would say give them all computers...it certainly would make economic sense..if we started equiping class 16..going down to class 1....at least the returns would be immediate.

But I also see this...as gov sort of starting a digital revolution..and what better way than have std1 kid have computer...parents and other stakeholders will have to dig in to provide computers for the rest.

It certainly won't make sense for high schools not to provide computers when a class 1 kid has computers.....from where...god knows..but gov should not have to shoulder everything..it enough that public taxes will be committed to equiping every class 1 kid joining public schools....parents should not shy from selling goats to buy older kids computers.

This should spark something.....and that thing we will not know for now.

I think all those are amazing and exciting developments.  I don't even knows if we are differing on anything with respect to where technology is going.  My point was only partly on the development of children.  But also on the sustainability of the program.

I think that the human interaction remains the most critical in the child's learning.  How much attention the child's needs are given by the teacher is more crucial than how easy it is for that child to get information from the web.  Most kids will end up playing games online when they would benefit from playing outside.

The real disagreement seems to be about introducing technology to the school environment.  Rather than laptops for all children, it makes economic and learning sense to me, to make sure every secondary school has a well-equipped computer lab and well trained teachers for the same .  What is your argument against that?

[MOON Ki]

That is crazy idea. Bill Gates, Zuckerberg and name all those guys spent their childhood with computers not running around dancing.

Really?   I'll have to check, but much of the information I have seen suggests that those guys (including Steve Jobs) did not involved with computers until something like the age of 13 or so.

[RV Pundit]

How many 13yrs old had computers then. Their fathers invested early on them. You can bet every serious parent in developed country has their kids on computers as soon as they are born.

Really?   I'll have to check, but much of the information I have seen suggests that those guys (including Steve Jobs) did not involved with computers until something like the age of 13 or so.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I think you are yet to fully grasp and appreciate what kind of revolutionary change we are on to. Kids and adults in the future may benefit more from online or virtual interraction that right now. That curriculum need to change...

As for priority...if we had all the money..I would say give them all computers...it certainly would make economic sense..if we started equiping class 16..going down to class 1....at least the returns would be immediate.

But I also see this...as gov sort of starting a digital revolution..and what better way than have std1 kid have computer...parents and other stakeholders will have to dig in to provide computers for the rest.

It certainly won't make sense for high schools not to provide computers when a class 1 kid has computers.....from where...god knows..but gov should not have to shoulder everything..it enough that public taxes will be committed to equiping every class 1 kid joining public schools....parents should not shy from selling goats to buy older kids computers.

This should spark something.....and that thing we will not know for now.

I think all those are amazing and exciting developments.  I don't even knows if we are differing on anything with respect to where technology is going.  My point was only partly on the development of children.  But also on the sustainability of the program.

I think that the human interaction remains the most critical in the child's learning.  How much attention the child's needs are given by the teacher is more crucial than how easy it is for that child to get information from the web.  Most kids will end up playing games online when they would benefit from playing outside.

The real disagreement seems to be about introducing technology to the school environment.  Rather than laptops for all children, it makes economic and learning sense to me, to make sure every secondary school has a well-equipped computer lab and well trained teachers for the same .  What is your argument against that?

I would  equip high-school labs first.  The kids in primary will benefit when they get there.  It's cheaper and potentially benefits a larger group.  Knowledge base will also be better suited.  They are better suited to decide whether it is something they want to pursue.

At a lower level, these should just be teaching aids.  Like radios.  vooke will say We had radio programs in primary school.  But no Negro expected us to take them home and tinker with them.  It's only in secondary school that budding electronic engineers was able to open them up and look inside with a meaningful curiosity.

I suspect your real concern is catching that rare genius who can benefit from early exposure, but I could be wrong.  I think that itself is an argument in favor of more interaction with a well trained teacher.

[RV Pundit]

No. My real concern is that computers is probably the only thing these kids will ever have. They don't have teachers or any traditionally functioning systems you'd expect from a schools. Their teachers are either illiterate or lazy or drunk or just don't show up.

This is NOT an ADD_ON. This is perhaps the only thing these kids have and need to learn stuff.

A computer is unlike anything...it everything you'll ever need...if you plug it to the internet..and that is pretty much sorted by mobile providers.

I suspect your real concern is catching that rare genius who can benefit from early exposure, but I could be wrong.  I think that itself is an argument in favor of more interaction with a well trained teacher.

[MOON Ki]

You can bet every serious parent in developed country has their kids on computers as soon as they are born.

Really?   Which developed country would that be?   

Did you see what kadudu wrote?

Pundit, you will be surprised that in Palo Alto where many of the Silicon Valley elite live most schools there do not offer any computer lessons for the kids. Computers in many schools there are no-go-zone for the students. The parents who earn their living from these gadgets keep their kids away from them. What an irony!

[RV Pundit]

Anywhere in the developed world. Kadudu is negro who has her kids dancing to lingala instead of spending time in a computer. If dancing and playing was education; africa would be leading; for surely no other kids play that much.

Really?   Which developed country would that be?   

Did you see what kadudu wrote?

[Kadudu]

 
Dancing to Lingala is better than those silly games kids play on pcs.
BTW Pundit, I am male hapana female.

Anywhere in the developed world. Kadudu is negro who has her kids dancing to lingala instead of spending time in a computer. If dancing and playing was education; africa would be leading; for surely no other kids play that much.

Really?   Which developed country would that be?   

Did you see what kadudu wrote?

[MOON Ki]

No. My real concern is that computers is probably the only thing these kids will ever have. They don't have teachers or any traditionally functioning systems you'd expect from a schools. Their teachers are either illiterate or lazy or drunk or just don't show up.

In that case, first focus on the fundamental problem.   

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

No. My real concern is that computers is probably the only thing these kids will ever have. They don't have teachers or any traditionally functioning systems you'd expect from a schools. Their teachers are either illiterate or lazy or drunk or just don't show up.

This is NOT an ADD_ON. This is perhaps the only thing these kids have and need to learn stuff.

A computer is unlike anything...it everything you'll ever need...if you plug it to the internet..and that is pretty much sorted by mobile providers.

I suspect your real concern is catching that rare genius who can benefit from early exposure, but I could be wrong.  I think that itself is an argument in favor of more interaction with a well trained teacher.

That would seem like throwing up your hands and handing over your kids to the internet.  I don't think that is the goal of the government.  They made a campaign promise that some people loved to give a laptop to every child. 

It's more realistic and sustainable to equip a good lab for each high school.  They don't have to buy so many thousands(millions?) of tablets every new school year.  Nor worry about refurbishing lost, broken stolen equipment.  Because kids at that age will break these things with abandon.

To me, the laptop idea, while a sexy campaign promise, reeks of a scam with dubious benefits, when someone in a position to do so suggests implementing it.  We know that is not far fetched.

[vooke]

I think Termie has a point. A kid goes through years with a computer and then a 4yr break in high school,and then real life...Not smart.

But if they cleared primary school only to run into well equipped labs for 4 years and then life, they have realistic chances of being something.

I think I heard Ouru say that primary school is just a start. They will move to high schools soon after. So this primary vs high school debate may be misplaced

[RV Pundit]

Computer Lab is so 10 yrs ago. Nowadays laptops are very cheap. Gov can get very cheap laptops for every kid. Less than 100 dollars. If there is no corruption.

To me, the laptop idea, while a sexy campaign promise, reeks of a scam with dubious benefits, when someone in a position to do so suggests implementing it.  We know that is not far fetched.

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

Computer Lab is so 10 yrs ago. Nowadays laptops are very cheap. Gov can get very cheap laptops for every kid. Less than 100 dollars. If there is no corruption.

To me, the laptop idea, while a sexy campaign promise, reeks of a scam with dubious benefits, when someone in a position to do so suggests implementing it.  We know that is not far fetched.

Maybe 2030 the mkonomrefu will automagically pull back after the vision is achieved.

I don't see the lab concept as being outdated at all.  A couple of boxes with an OS like Linux should be cover all bases until  quantum computers hit the market. 

Another reason to favor high-schools.  Besides being in a better position to appreciate and learn the technologies, these are folks who are about to hit the market. 

[Kim Jong-Un's Pajama Pants]

I think Termie has a point. A kid goes through years with a computer and then a 4yr break in high school,and then real life...Not smart.

But if they cleared primary school only to run into well equipped labs for 4 years and then life, they have realistic chances of being something.

I think I heard Ouru say that primary school is just a start. They will move to high schools soon after. So this primary vs high school debate may be misplaced

Even if they are to introduce them everywhere, it would still make more sense to start with the high-schools.