Larry Cuban posted this article by Benjamin Herold, who writes for Education Week about technology, on his blog.
The term “personalized learning” has been captured by the technology industry to represent computer-based instruction. Some people think it would be justifiable to refer to computer-based instruction as “depersonalized learning” since a computer is a machine and not a person.
The other terms the tech industry has used for marketing purposes are “individualized” and “customized.”
Herold’s review is balanced and appropriately critical, distinguishing between independent research and marketing.
The studies seem to use test scores as the best indicator of success. These scores may gauge of whether sutudents learned what the computer taught them, but says nothing about whether they could pass a test of similar material that the machine didn’t teach them.
And that’s without going into what should be the lasting effects of education: the ability to think independently, to ask questions, to think outside the box, to accomplish tasks for intrinsic purposes, rather than to win a prize.
Many educators think that the goal of computer-based instruction is to develop classrooms without teachers; a paraprofessional could be available to answer questions about the technology. Is that where the tech industry is headed? Consider this recent article in Bloomberg News which hailed the development of ships without sailors. “Doing away with sailors will make the high seas safer and cleaner.”
It sounds like a ghost story: A huge cargo vessel sails up and down the Norwegian coast, silently going about its business, without a captain or crew in sight. But if all goes as planned, it’s actually the future of shipping.
96% of all marine casualties are caused by human error. Solution: get rid of the humans. Problem solved.
from novemoore http://ift.tt/2r9qDsk
Nova Moore Blog 