I would offer a couple of ideas for this discussion.

First, we need to segment our thinking about distribution and uses of technology between high poverty areas in a country, and the rest of the country. In high poverty areas access to technology in the home, and the school, along with the resources to maintain and constantly upgrade the technology, and mentors in the family and community to model uses of the technology, is far less than in more affluent areas.

Second, I think you point about the cost to sustain uses of technology being higher than the initial costs of acquiring it, it really important, especially as public funds for eduction become more and more difficult to expand. I would propose a solution that is a step beyond your suggestion that technology not be integrated in the classroom. I would suggest that an effort be made to use the technology that is in the business community, but not being highly used in the after work and weekend hours.

How many organizations in the geography of a school use computers for work, and constantly invest in the upgrade of their technology, because of it’s business applications? Imagine if kids were able to spend a few hours on a weekend, or an evening, with a business volunteer, at a computer workstation. If the volunteer were trained to facilitate learning, and coach the youth to use on-line content created by professionals, their own practical experience using technology might be a greater motivator for student learning than that of a classroom teacher with little experience of applying technology beyond the classroom.

If such a partnership were developed it could dramatically lower the cost to the school of obtaining and maintaining the technology, and provide relevant associations between learning and work that might motivate more kids to become more dedicated learners.

I’m sure there would be many obstacles to this, but the potential benefits and cost savings should not be overlooked.

This article was very inspiring to me. I could not agree more to the fact that systematic changes are needed for tertiary insitution to take into consideration technology now and for the future. Our educational systems must be aligned to societal changes.

I’m most encouraged, however, by our youngers, who do indeed believe that they can make just such decisions and who are just slightly befuddled and even more frustrated that we olders can’t.

I totally agree with your view of using technology to extend learning beyond classroom walls, not have every student with a computer working in class. For one, it’s a nightmare to get everything to work, and it’s a missed oportunity to do other things you can only do in a face-to-face environment.

Class time should be used for modelling, tutoring, claryfing, organizing, reflecting together, developing good communication and collaboration skills, etc. One or two computers with an Internet connection, a digital board or a video projector are very useful in class, but then students should work online on their own or use a media lab.

There has been a very livey discussion about the merits of the Magellan project, as you might guess, especially since it’s geared towards very young students. My impression is that the results are way too low for the investment made. I count myself among those who think that applying it to equip schools and train teachers would foster much better results. Of course, we still would need to change a lot in the way most schools and teachers view learning, cutting lecture time, having more workshop-like activities for students, more individual tutoring, more learning connected to real-life experiences (and the list goes on).

On a side note, it was great to finally have the opportunity to chat with you at Futurália, where Morten Paulsen and Paulo Simões were presenting. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to attend this great talk you gave right next door.