eLearning Fundi

Last year, I reported about the Kenyan Minister of Education claiming that with the introduction of new technology, many teachers would loose their jobs. I disagreed and a few days later the Kenyan Ministry of Education issued an errata stating the minister did not say that (although it is typical of any politician to always claim s/he was misquoted). That said, this did not seem to be the official position of the Kenyan government, because during its budget estimates, it provided for the employment of more teachers. In fact, though there are two conflicting reports, the Kenya government through the Teacher Service Commission is recruiting a multitude of teachers. (its is reported more than 14000 teachers on one section and 6000 teachers in another). You just trust the media to offer contradictory figures.

The minister’s comments then seemed to be a single case, but it seems to be a reflection of the perception within the political and policy making circles that eLearning will indeed increase interactivity to the level of phasing out teachers and professors in educational institutions. In neighbouring Tanzania (or is it the United Republic of Tanzania) the Minister for Education and Vocational Training, Prof Jumanne Maghembe, has said that IT will be used to cater for teacher shortages in schools. With a shortfall of 40 ooo teachers, Mobile phones, computers and projectors will be used not only to cater for the shortage of teachers, but also to improve on the enrolment rates. The minister is quoted to have said:

After the project is completed, we shall be able to use one teacher to teach many students and the shortage of teachers will be history in Tanzania

What I always seem to miss is what world some of this policy makers and politicians live especially when they have some (potential) ‘donors’ in their midst. They seem to have a rare and distant intelligence that make them utter words that might seem to be policy directions that are impractical to say the least. First, like I stated in May last year if the reason for introducing IT in schools is to do away with teachers, then that is the worst reason that can ever be. The mere introduction of IT in education brings about paradigmatic shifts and challenges in both quality and delivery (or imparting of knowledge).

This new paradigm requires the (teachers to transform into) facilitators to involve and engage student frequently to avert loneliness, low self-esteem, isolation, and low motivation to learn, whose consequences are low achievements or eventual drop-out. The engagement and involvement, both during the teaching and learning process, and the development of the learning materials and contexts translates to increased workloads for the facilitators and therefore the need for more teachers. This dual challenge of paradigm shift, and increased workload in the face of eLearning in the schools might lead to user resistance, and eventual failure. In fact, most of the change theorists and researcher have indicated that people would always resist anything that would challenge the status quo, or one that is perceived to bring about increased roles and responsibilities.

Secondly, the drop-out (also attrition, absenteeism) rates are reported to be higher in technology mediated classes than in the face to face classes. It is only difficult to proof absenteeism in the case of online learning because of the anywhere anytime philosphy. Completion rates to some on online programmes have been reported to be as low as 30%.

Prof Jumanne Maghembe, did you mean what you said or you were also misquoted? Or did you just read from a 1985 Apple Classroom of Tomorrow script?

Edit: 05-Aug-2008

A quote from The Citizen (Tanzania) of 2nd August:

Several African governments have turned to mobile phones and computers to mitigate the effects of teacher shortage they are facing.
Ethiopia, Ghana, Rwanda, South Africa, Tanzania and Zambia have started ICT projects involving mobile-phone messaging and computer-generated classrooms for both primary and secondary schools.

I am back to blogging after a well deserved break.

I am currently reading Scott Berkun’s book, the myths of innovation. It is good in informing me about research am doing for my doctorate on adoption of eLearning. The first chapter is very interesting, which in away questions where good (or great ideas) come from, and how they are generated.

Where do great ideas come from and how are they produced?
The myth of epiphany – a sudden manifestation of the essence or meaning of something – posits that whenever an innovation arises or is reported, tales of its magic moments are the first to appear. This is more so because myths are “often more satisfying … than the truth” (Berkun, 2007, p. 6). When innovations are being reported a number of myths go with them: Newton’s apple story and gravity; Archimedes and the bath tub;

However, innovations don’t happen in just one magical moment, and they are not completely new either. They are a build up of (hitherto unknown) innovations, a combination at times – where if any of the components is missing the innovations would not be realized. Therefore, imagining that epiphany plays a pivotal role in the innovation process is misguided. Probably, the epiphany – or the magical moments come when the last bit or last piece of an innovation is put into place, or when something being made for a different purpose realises some new use (e.g. Viagra).

One thing that arises though through the myth of epiphany is that there is need for innovators or creative thinkers to take breaks (go under apple trees; take a bath) so that they can experience the magical moment (the Eureka or wow moment).

This reminded me of my physics lessons whenever I encountered the famous inventors. I used to have a perception of them being lazy. In the Newton and the apples instance, I could add…
Newton was (probably) so lazy to climb on to the tree, or get some form of scaffold to get apples from the tree. Instead, he spent most of the time under the tree waiting for the apples to fall. The idea of him questioning gravity, in this case, came when he was fully satisfied? His question therefore was now that I am satisfied, why are the apples still falling (on me) instead (for example) of flying up?

A while ago, I talked of a presentation that I was tempted to go. I did go, and I have been fighting the temptation not to write about it. The reason I did not want to write about it is because it confirmed my worries about any presentation by Marketers and while doing their business.First, they use research to inform their marketing. For example, in the presentation I attended by Apple, research has shown that by the year 2009, more than 50% of training will be hybrid and that 80% of students will be using mobile technology. Secondly, use of ‘big’ and ‘unclear’ words to confuse their ‘prey’. For example in the presentation there was the use of hybrid (denoting the various modes of delivery of learning materials), click and brick (denoting online for clicks and classroom based for bricks teaching and learning). Thirdly, and related to the one above, using catch words – hyped. One specific quote is “Teaching the google-eyed YouTube generation”. Another part of the presentation I did not like is getting ideas from other people without attributing the source (O’Reilly’s Web 2.0)
Despite all this, I agreed with the presenters on principle that we need a whole new infrastructure for teaching and learning that should include: a collaborative environment, use of rich media in the classroom, learning focused on outcomes, the use the tools that the students are familiar with, and ability to deliver learning when, where, and how it is best received by the intended audience.
In the course of the presentation, there was supposedly to be a demo of the iLife (I did not get to see it) which did not succeed because “the resolution on the computer….and his ‘not working for apple’” and after all the person doing the “presentation was an educators not a techie”. Its description looked like it might be a good thing but am not ready to dispose my computer for a Mac. I can do most (if not all) the things cataloged as the edge of iLife with my old laptop – using a number of Free and Open Software as I will discussing soon.

Apple is offering a presentation of their iPod (though not explicitly stated) in Cape Town in a campaign code named “Podcasting in e-learning”. Some educational experts “will address the key issues and opportunities afforded by podcasting as an educational tool for eLearning.” I am tempted to attend, although I am very apprehensive of any marketing campaign. I am very wary of salesmen because I know a good salesman would sell you something you will throw in the next trash bin for twice its market price. However, I would want to see, and be among the people who are in the forefront of the eLearning ‘e-volution’. I have a belief (still naive) that podcasting can add value in the teaching and learning process.

In my mind, when thinking about attending this presentation, an article I read a while ago by Heather-Jane Robertson – “Towards a theory of Negativity Teacher Education and Information and Communication Technology” linger in mind. In the article, there is the warning of the vulnerability of educators to take any technology with the ‘naive faith’ in its promises. This vulnerability, unfortunately, is perpetuated by the marketers who back their marketing on research that has either failed or is inconclusive. Robertson disputes the ‘findings’ claimed to have been arrived at by Apple that “Classroom Computers = Remarkable Results” and how Apple applies its marketing campaign to win educational customers.

In the light of Robertson’s sentiments about the claims on technology, and with my apprehension about marketers, I am enticed to go there to listen, and maybe see what ‘e-volution’ in learning Apple is claiming to bring us. I know, imaginatively, Apple is targeting the education sector through this campaign because it is a rich and wide market. I also, know some of us will fall for the marketing campaign without knowing whether whatever we buy, will be more useful in the next trash bin or will indeed ‘extend the learning experience beyond the walls of the lecture hall.”

See: Robertson, H. 2003. Towards a Theory of Negativity, Teacher Education and Information and Communication Technology, Journal of Teacher Education, 54(4): 280-296