[mattquinn]

I have a lot of issues with what you just posted. Perhaps the biggest is enforcing a division between "best teachers" and "run-of-the-mill teachers" into a corporate project management of sorts. I'm not sure where you work, but just imagine if someone deemed you a "run-of-the-mill" employee and relegated you to watching people interact with tablets all day.

Some areas of life require a delicate moderation of technology, and education is one of them. Anyone who drools over education as a "start-up opportunity" likely hasn't done their research.

[heynk]

>Some areas of life require a delicate moderation of technology, and education is one of them.

Care to explain why? The GP had some valid points and your rebuttal is that he or she 'hasn't done their research,' without making a single valid point. The metaphor about 'watching people interact with tablets' is not at all what GP mentioned. He suggested that teachers design what interactions take place, and take a proactive role in ensuring that their interactions are effective, while still injecting 'human' aspects of teaching.

[mattquinn]

> "He suggested that teachers design what interactions take place..."

This is exactly my point. Those who work with software/tech/etc often trivialize the relationship between software and people who hold completely different societal roles. No matter how intuitive you make an application, no matter how effective you seem to think your application enhances learning, there will always be a vast number of people (in this case, teachers) who have not the time, nor the desire, to "design" a set of "interactions" for their student.

Are there effective teaching aids available for tablets? Yes. Does that translate to a need for technology-guided learning in more aspects of education? Absolutely not.

The OP talks about "a complete reset on education with technology at its core." I stand by my point; this is a dangerous idea. And you don't have to believe me, most any teacher will tell you this is a bad idea. Teacher flexibility and intuition is (usually) right; software isn't going to magically determine a child's academic strengths and weaknesses.

Education is not some cookie-cutter problem you can fix with a well-designed app.

[ThomPete]

Read Seymor Papert "mindstorms"

[mattquinn]

The publication date was August 4, 1993. Not to say it's irrelevant, but alot has changed since then.

We are all going to disagree about how much tech is too much in education. On the other hand, very few disagree that tech has no place in hospitals, the enterprise, supply chain management, etc. That alone illustrates to me how ridiculous it is to treat education as a space needing a "reset."

[DennisP]

I don't know, I've been learning an awful lot from Khan, Coursera, and Udacity over the past couple months.