Reading the closing speeches

http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/121


A few phrases that I liked from Daniels:

• technology has underperformed because it is usually applied to help the teacher teach rather than to help the learner learn
• technology may increase the reach of a poor teacher but it will not improve the quality of their teaching

·         Daniels accused the moderator of being a traditionalist and this borne out by his fear of parents being left out of the educational loop.

I felt that he was bordering on ranting and offensive - almost desperate by the end - desperate for us to see the error of our thinking that he might be wrong in making the motion.
A few comments from Kozma:

• Before this project, they did not know we existed. Now we are citizens of the world
• With technology, these teachers can communicate with colleagues around the country and they can access a portal with the latest curriculum materials
• Ministries of Education in Chile and Singapore, Finland and Jordan, Korea and Costa Rica are redesigning their education systems around the opportunities that new technologies provide. - I think Daniels would welcome this but again stress that it is done to solve a solution not just for the sake of adding technology

Kozma continued to give his empirical evidence of success stories, he seemed calmer in his argument - less worried - it almost seemed like it didn't matter if you agreed with him because he was still confident that technology was improving education whether we believe him or not.
The moderator attempted to be the voice of reason between the two 'extreme' views given, adding some agreement here, and some descent there. He asked questions about some comments to make you think about the impact of what the two speakers were saying.