After two periods of International English, we've watched both a short documentary and a lecture on the topic of IT-resources and their place in education. Although these clips, or rather the men who appear in them, deserve due respect for emphasizing scholarly independence, their arguments are far from flawless. I'll list some drawbacks or problems:
1. Criticism is dismissed as "myths" and critics as "conservatives".
2. If IT-tools were to be used as extensively as their champions seemingly desire, the time wasted on set up of equipment, installation of software or simply learning the tool would be pointless if an easier, manual solution is possible. For example, downloading and learning how to use a brainstorming program seems like a sad waste when compared to the far simpler pen-and-paper or chalk-and-blackboard alternatives. Or using internet chat rooms or forums for schoolwork instead of, or in addition to, verbal discussion.
3. Despite the assurance of these supporters, I strongly believe that students will be tempted by sudden access to multimedia information and entertainment, unless blessed with a competent and charismatic teacher in combination with subject matter that each individual student finds compelling.
Another passion expressed, at least by the second supporter, is the need for a global curriculum built on the use of IT-resources. However well-intended, I don't think the idea is feasible, and, furthermore, I see that as a good thing:
1. Despite increased globalization (much of it a result of the growth of the internet), the nature of the labor required in each country varies. However, for richer students who do not choose trade-specific courses of education, there is certainly a growing, universal demand for IT-competence.
2. The same challenge presented to foreign nationals seeking international employment who do not come from English-speaking countries, will be presented to those who graduate from schools or universities where IT-resources aren't taught, utilized or emphasized because of a lack in funding. This increases inequity between, as always, primarily MEDC's and LEDC's, as focus will be put on one student or worker's ability to present or express his or her work, rather than another's competence or overall skill in the field in question. It is undesirable to create a situation where skilled workers are delegated to meaner tasks because they cannot communicate with flashy modern tools, just like immigrants with doctorates in Western Europe who drive taxis because they can't speak the native language.
The bottom line is, I suppose, that teaching and utilizing IT-resources raises questions of efficiency and international and inter-class equality versus progress, while the idea of a global curriculum faces the problem of variations in needs, demands and culture.
