Group items tagged

implications of digital technology should be considered when deciding whether to incorporate computer teaching tools into classroom instruction.

many older people may absorb more or learn faster by flipping through pages, because their brains have been trained to read hard copy, whereas younger readers may learn faster digitally, because they're accustomed to working online

Besides free and universal high-level education from comprehensive school to university (6% of GDP directed to public education), Finland stresses also equal opportunity for all, irrespective of domicile, sex, economic situation or mother tongue. Teachers are required to be trained in dealing with low-achieving students, as well as students with disabilities and learning difficulties.

The fact that education is free, including travel expenses, welfare services, accommodation, books and other school material, means that students can focus more of their time on learning, rather than all the other distractions that might come with it.

Interestingly, a teacher must have a master's degree to teach in Finland, and also have a lifelong learning program mapped out for them. They emphasize a lot on lifelong learning, and it is kind of embedded into the their learning culture.

Finland don't rank students or schools, and they don't emphasize on standardized nationwide examinations that drive students, teachers and parents nuts.

I personally believe (based on my shallow understanding) the Finnish education system has managed to infuse discipline, hard work, and competitiveness, but at the same time also infuse the right balance to nurture critical skills required for the 21 century, which include communication, collaboration, creativity (innovativeness), critical thinking, problem solving, digital literacy, flexibility, adaptability, global care/awareness, and emotional intelligence.

In addition, the Finnish education system is rather decentralized and schools are given a degree of freedom (independence) to develop their own curriculum. The problem with having a centralized system and curriculum, is that if you get it wrong, the whole country will suffer. Also, with a top-down model, it is difficult to quickly innovate and spark changes to the curriculum that is needed to deal with the increasingly disruptive learning world that we are experiencing today. However, in a decentralized system, schools can easily change and adapt as they learn, and also they have more freedom to explore and try out new things, without needing to worry about ranking of this and that.

Finally, Finland emphasizes big time on research and development (around 4% of GDP), and have interlinked companies with the Universities to collaborate on new innovations. Whatever they do, their approach is very scientific, which of course includes how they are continuously improving their education systems.

Focus less on exams, and more on learning.

Focus more on teacher education, and less on centralized content/curriculum.

Focus less on investing on flowers and big buildings, and more on equipping educators and students with the learning tools needed to transform the way they learn.

A second emergent field concerns social media literacy. An increasing amount of important communication occurs through Web 2.0 services.

Can the practice of using a CMS prepare either teacher or student to think critically about this new shape for information literacy? Moreover, can we use the traditional CMS to share thoughts and practices about this topic?

And so we can think of the CMS. What is it best used for? We have said little about its integration with campus information systems, but these are critical for class (not learning) management, from attendance to grading. Web 2.0 has yet to replace this function. So imagine the CMS function of every class much like class email, a necessary feature, but not by any means the broadest technological element. Similarly the e-reserves function is of immense practical value. There may be no better way to share copyrighted academic materials with a class, at this point. These logistical functions could well play on.

Students can publish links to external objects, but can’t link back in.

Researchers warned that “various online learning implementation practices may have differing effectiveness for K–12 learners than they do for older students,” which seems plausible.

The word education, after all, comes from the Latin educare, which means, “to lead out.” I.e., think Socrates. Anyone can absorb information from a book or video, but good teachers will always be necessary to draw out that knowledge and help students develop the skills needed to think critically about the information they consume. In other words, online learning tools are just like any other tools in a teacher’s bag of tricks: what matters is how they’re applied. The instruction of good teachers will be made better by the proper application of web tools, while bad teachers won’t necessarily be made better by utilizing online education methods.

It comes down to knowing how to best use the tools at your disposal to maximize the impact of education for students, which has always been what separates good teachers from bad ones. The major difference between teachers of today and teachers of the future is that in the future educators will have better online tools and will require better specialized training to learn how to utilize them properly.

Teachers will certainly need to adapt in order to use new tools and methods, but that’s nothing new. Online education may never completely replace face-to-face learning, though as the Department of Education study shows, with enough time and under the guidance of a good teacher, online learning environments can produce results that are just as good or better than classroom learning. Online learning is likely to be used more often to enhance face-to-face learning in the future, however, and in communities where classroom learning is infeasible due to lack of funds, online learning is an adequate stand-in.