A few decades ago Computer Aided Design (CAD) software packages became commercially available. CAD software was developed as an aid to drawing technical diagrams; the software made it possible to draw diagrams in a few minutes that previously took draftsmen hours, if not days, to complete.
Surprisingly many draftsmen resisted the use of CAD software. They figured that it posed a threat to their careers. If computers were to be used to draw diagrams, what were they going to do?
However, some thinking draftsmen accepted the software and started using it to take the drudgery out of their jobs, while they elevated their own involvement to higher levels of design. For them CAD proved to be a powerful boon. Those draftsmen who did not embrace technology were phased out over time.
Today practically all technical drawings are done by means of CAD.
Educators are occupying a similar space that draftsmen did years ago. Technology is changing the face of education. Many educators are not prepared to accept the challenge of coming to grips with educational software. It is not as if they are scared of technology; they fear that technology will take over their jobs. If computers are used to teach learners, what are teachers going to do? And so they resist technology because they see it as a threat to their careers.
Farsighted educators behave differently. They embrace the new opportunities that are presented to them and elevate their personal involvement to a higher level; technology enables them to be true facilitators of the learning process, while using computers for more mundane tasks such as drill and practice and the dissemination of learning content.
Keeping in mind the draftsmen analogy, where will educators be in a decade from now if they do not adapt to a mode of education where technology plays a significant role?
| related link
In 1922 Thomas Edison predicted boldly: "I believe that the motion picture is destined to revolutionize our educational system and that in a few years it will supplant largely, if not entirely, the use of textbooks. I would say that on the average we get only about two percent efficiency out of texbooks as they are written today."
In the 1960s television was hailed by some as the solution to poor education. The idea was put forward that lessons from excellent teachers could be recorded and then broadcasted to millions of learners. Video recording equipment made it possible for these lessons to be recorded and played over and over again. Many believed that television would revolutionize education.
If one looks back over the past decades it is clear that neither the motion picture, nor its more modern manifestation, television, was the panacea that it was claimed to be. It is true that these forms of technology were, and in some instances still are, used extensively in schools and put to good use. They are particularly useful in gripping the imagination of learners and providing information in an entertaining way. However, these technologies did not change the way educators taught. The system of teaching was still teachercenrtric: the teacher decides when the video is to be seen by the learners.
Today there are some that believe that computer technology could change the entire education system. The question is now whether computers will be used in the same way that film and television were used up till now.
Or are we going to grab the opportunity to use the power of computers to change the way we are teaching, moving towards a learnercentric approach?
Is this possible, or, if we look back in twenty years time, will we conclude that the computer was just a fad that had no impact on education?
| related link
One of the most common technical problems in a school is the server that goes down. Owing to a variety of reasons, it often takes an unacceptably long period to get the server going again. During this time the computer facility is not used and curriculum delivery cannot take place.
Or that is we allow ourselves to believe?
Consider the lesson in innovation in Aesop's fable about the Crow and the Bottle.
A crow perishing with thirst saw a bottle, and hoping to find water, flew to it with delight. When he reached it, he discovered to his grief that it contained so little water that he could not possibly get at it. He tried everything he could think of to reach the water, but all his efforts were in vain. At last he collected as many stones as he could carry and dropped them one by one with his beak into the bottle, until he brought the water within his reach and thus saved his life.
This story illustrates that necessity is indeed the mother of invention.
Khanya as a project has been praised for its innovative approach. But how innovative are we when things go wrong? When the server goes down? Is there a Plan B that educators can fall back on, so that when the network is down, each individual workstation can still be used by learners in their quest to come to grips with the curriculum?
Can we toss pebbles at the problem or do we sit back and allow the bottleneck to thwart our noble efforts?
| related link
As the number of schools using technology in the Western Cape is swelling, the need for a technical post in every school is becoming increasingly apparent.
Many educators are doing excellent work in keeping their computer facilities going, but they are not technicians. Khanya is arranging for technical training for these teachers, but they still have their "day job" to contend with.
It is clear that, sooner rather than later, posts for technical staff in schools must be negotiated with the authorities. This consultation is taking place right now. In the mean time, it is no use bemoaning the fact that it is not happening. "The Department should create a technician post in every school," one hears very often. True, but who is going to force the Department to do it? While discussions are taking place, there is no value in "the-Department-should" grumbles.
There is great wisdom in Aesop's fable about a group of mice and a cat:
The mice had a general council to consider what measures they could take to outwit their common enemy, the Cat. Some said this and some said that; at last a young mouse got up with a proposal.
"You will all agree," said he, "that our chief danger consists in the sly and treacherous manner in which the enemy approaches us. Now, if we could receive some signal of her approach, we could easily escape from her. I venture, therefore, to propose that a small bell be procured, and attached by a ribbon round the neck of the Cat. By this means we should always know when she was about, and could easily retire while she was in the neighbourhood."
This proposal met with general applause, until an old mouse got up and said: "That is all very well, but who is to bell the Cat?" The mice looked at one another and nobody spoke.
Then the old mouse said: "It is easy to propose impossible remedies."
For us the question is: "Who will bell the Department?" And more importantly: "What are we going to do while the Deparment is not belled?"
| related link
Computer technology is advancing at a mind boggling rate. The moment one purchases a piece of equipment it is already outdated. Hardware is becoming faster, better, smaller and software more sophisticated.
People who love technology want to have access to the latest and greatest. One often hears the term "leading edge technology". This expression has its root it the nautical term for the front edge of a sail that faces the wind; the leading edge is where the action is.
Sometimes the term "cutting edge" is used. It simply means the edge that cuts; you cut cheese by applying the cutting edge of the knife to the cheese and then pushing down on the knife. Once again, it is where the action is. Cutting edge technology refers to the most up to date, the most advanced technology available.
The question is: should schools go for leading edge or cutting edge technology? Some may argue in favour of this. "What is the point of exposing our learners to out-dated technology?" is a question sometimes asked.
Whereas one does not want to use extinct technology in schools, it is not always necessary to have the very latest equipment. The first Khanya schools are now six years old, and most of these schools are still using the original equipment very successfully.
The cutting edge is also sometimes called the "bleeding edge". (Cut through the cheese into your finger, and you'll get the drift.) This implies that using the latest technology is often risky because it has not been tested with enough users and may not perform as expected. It also carries the thought of draining valuable resources.
What will it be for schools: leading edge, cutting edge, bleeding edge? Or should they be content to be a short step behind?
| related link
Back Next
Kobus van Wyk - Blog
|
      Copyright © Kobus van Wyk 2008
|
|
Calendar