Doelstellingen van frequent gebruik ICT in klas niet bereikt, volgens prof. onderwijsgeschiedenis Larry Cuban.
Is het dan nog zinvol zoveel en steeds meer te investeren in ICT, jonge kinderen te leren programmeren ....?, vraagt Cuban zich af. Paul Schnabel, voorzitter Nederlandse taskforce onderwijs vindt alvast ook dat leren programmeren geen (algemeen) vak mag worden.
So within the past decade, the three-legged rationale justifying district decisions to buy laptops, tablet...s, and new software has been demolished.
* No more hype about improving academic achievement. (cf. OESO-rapport e.d.)
*No more words about revolutionizing teaching: leerkracht-geleid leerproces hield stand
*What remains is the strictly vocational aim of preparing this generation of students for jobs.
As has occurred time and again during surges of school reforminserting new technologies into classrooms is simply another reformthe deeper and more important issue gets side-stepped; What are the overall purposes of tax-supported public schools in a democracy?
The OECD report offers U. S. policymakers a rare opportunity to step back and ask why are we spending so much money on devices and software when the results in so many nations, including the U.S., show such little return on investment?
The shift to justifying outlays of so much public money for tablets, interactive whiteboards, and glamorous software shows up in the mania for requiring high school students to take computer science courses (see New York City). The spread of coding camps and teaching kindergarteners to write code (see here and here) are also part of this rationale for buying more and more devices and software with scarce education dollars.
Meer weergeven