When I first heard this idea from President Obama I scoffed. Throughout history the people at the top create the jobs and it trickles down to the "regular" folks. I thought it was political pandering to the masses. However, when I put that together with the idea of the "Classroom of the Future" (an idea I scoffed at, too) something clicked. Now, mind you, I have little patience for the cry for a classroom filled with the latest gadgets and all we have to do is provide more and funds magically creating a well educated populace. Education, like all other pursuits, is fraught with politics; everyone has an agenda and a bad foundation cannot be helped with technology.
First, let me define education: A minimum standard of the 3 R's-Reading, Writing and 'Rithmetic. I would be thrilled if we could just accomplish that. In the past, we have given minimal attempts at it for the "unwashed" masses so they could work in the factories and businesses, but have you noticed how more than that is very hard to come by? Indeed, lately, even the minimums are not met.
Knowing what has been in the past, though, does not mean that: 1) It is right or 2) That it cannot change. The President is right that the "masses" do get the least of society. What does work, though? The United States has managed to create a society where minimal standards of housing, food and work are available to most people. Please don't tell me the problems with these minimal standards; they are better than the rest of the world even in this recession. The world looks to us to "fix" their problems and that says much. How was it done? It was done with the free market system, something that works like evolution leaving the best, suitable choice. That system is harsh, to be sure, and I do agree with some safeguards against monopolies and huge corporations, just as we need those safeguards on government, but the overall result is good.
With adequate safeguards, this system has worked the best. What would the classroom of the future look like with this in mind? In the spirit of the capitalism, why not turn education on its ear? Why not take the beginning, the 3 R's (which are all basically memorization) and have that all accomplished by the time our children walk into the classroom. Is that radical, or what? Think it is asking for too much? Well, reading is basically memorization-26 letters and 44 sounds. I am not talking about comprehension, and why should I? Children cannot comprehend all that they hear, and they are not meant too. All that comes with time; first they learn how to listen and speak, even mimicking what they hear, then they learn what it means. Why not with use this idea with reading? Writing can follow that pattern, and of course Arithmetic is all facts. Why not have really cool video games? The computer can take something that is monotonous, especially for a living teacher, and make it a game, with a teacher who is infinitely patient, infinitely (almost) able to come up with different approaches. We have all seen 3, 4 and 5 year olds maneuver around a computer with ease. We cannot say they are not capable of playing and conquering games of this level of complexity.
If we had some competition in the creation of these games and a will to do this, what would it be like to have all that accomplished in kindergarten or 1st grade? The whole elementary curriculum would be done. The ever sought for higher learning would be wide open. Why do we have to have living teachers for memorization? We denigrate memorization, but we use it, sloppily. Let the gaming industry take this over, have several different types. Let them go crazy!
What do I see as the role for school? All those things that are not memorized; that mentoring touch, all the things that are human and not machine. What would be really radical (oh I am naughty) is to include history, logic and philosophy with one or two other languages thrown in. Talk about an equalizing effect. Think about a populace that has access to what has happened in the past and can extrapolate into the future on many different levels. It has long amazed me the tired old tricks that are trotted out by our elites (those who rule us and run the world). The elites would have quite a problem trying to "subdue" or trick the masses then. I don't believe it would raise the IQs or anything magically revolutionary like that, but bear in mind, the Bell curve exists in the Elites as well as the masses. At least we would have a fighting chance. Of course, if it was truly understood what I proposed, it would be opposed, but in true entrepreneurial style, we wouldn't need government or whoever's permission. Freedom and capitalism could accomplish the goal.