The two articles the Minimally Invasive Education research in India were very interesting. During the “hole in the wall” project, unsupervised and unguided children from low socioeconomic areas in India were presented with opportunities to acquire computer skills. Isn’t it interesting how children can learn independently, regardless of who or where they are, and without regard to socio-economic status? These children in India learned to operate a computer with the freedom to seek help from other children, lack of structured setting and with the absence of the aid of a school or teachers. What a testament to children's ability to learn without structure or professional intervention. All children are naturally curious and (as we have been discussing this semester) will continue to pursue understanding if they feel they can succeed. I am curious how this research shows support for the increased implementation of technology into lower socioeconomic areas in the United States. Could technology (with lack of structured oversight) be an essential tool in increasing self-efficacy in these schools?
After class, I was pondering the idea of teachers choosing to strike for better salaries. Many teachers may choose NOT to spend their time/resources participating in a strike because the risk of an improved salary does not outweigh the sacrifice of summer vacation. They simply do not have enough collective efficacy to strike, so they chose the vacation. What causes enough teachers to gather and sacrifice the vacation for the potential of a raise? Is it relationships? Is it professional pressure? Is it being fed up with the status quo? It seems to me that each teacher’s “breaking point” would vary, based on varying personal and professional experiences and motivations.
No comments:
Post a Comment