teaching or learning

Upload: cmcgoun

Post on 08-Apr-2018

213 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • 8/7/2019 Teaching or Learning

    1/3

    Teaching or Learning?

    The first computer kiosk was set up in 1999 in Kalkaji slum in New Delhi, India. For a number

    of years Dr Gupta then Director of research at the Centre for Research in Cognitive Systems, had

    been thinking about how computer-based education could serve Indias poor. He had a hunch

    that poor children with little education could teach themselves the basics of computer literacy

    and in doing so open a window to knowledge about the world. To test his idea he embedded a

    computer with a high-speed internet connection into a wall (hence, often referred to as hole in

    the wall) that divided the Institute where he and his team worked from a slum area, strewn with

    rubbish and used by local street kids. He left the computer on, monitored its use remotely and

    installed a video camera in a nearby tree to watch what happened. What he watched was the

    ways in which the slum children who hung around in car park intuitively picked up the skills

    they needed to use the machine. They self-organised and began teaching themselves what they

    needed to know with unending curiosity and thirst for knowledge. The fact that the programmes

    they discovered were all in English was not a problem: they learned the English they needed and

    even substituted their own words for icons (such as the hourglass that indicates some kind of

    loading process is taking place) when no words were indicated. Within a few days the children

    who were mostly aged 6-10 and who did not attend school, had learned how to browse the Web,

    play games, create documents and paint pictures See

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2000/oct/17/itforschools.Schools5;

    http://www.greenstar.org/butterflies/Hole-in-the-Wall.htm

    http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/india/kids.Html;. For any parent with children of the

    same age this would not now appear such a surprising result. Children seem to take to

  • 8/7/2019 Teaching or Learning

    2/3

    computers in ways that continue to surprise older generations. However the implications of this

    social experiment are much more suggestive given its context.

    I'm saying that, in situations where we cannot intervene very frequently, you can multiply the

    effectiveness of 10 teachers by 100 - or 1,000 - fold if you give children access to the Internet....

    This is a system of education where you assume that children know how to put two and two

    together on their own. So you stand aside and intervene only if you see them going in a direction

    that might lead into a blind alley. That's just so that you don't waste time... (Mitra, Businessweek

    Online 2000)

    This concept of minimal intervention suggests that children can actually teach themselves

    many of the things that teachers normally assume is their job to teach. Self-directed learning

    replaces teacher-centric education and frees a teachers time to support pupils in more individual,

    personalised ways. The social implications of this are staggering in a world where, despite

    commitments to universal primary education, some 68 million primary-school-age children are

    currently not enrolled http://www.uis.unesco.Org/ . Guptas Hole in the Wall is suggestive of

    the kind of radical transformation that the use of technology could bring to education. That

    education can improve where there are fewer teachers, not more, is a powerful message. It is not

    surprising that he was awarded the Best Social Innovation of 2000 by the British Institute for

    Social Inventions nor that the ideas behind his experiment have spread. Research into hole-in-

    the-wall computers, now referred to as Minimally Invasive Education Learning Stations has

    continued throughout the past ten years and now centres on the ways in which the emergence and

    development of group social processes aids individual learning. Much of it shows that children

    learn more through interaction with others, particularly their peers, than in the more passive,

    receptive activities that dominate formal schooling (Dangwal & Kapur, 2009).

  • 8/7/2019 Teaching or Learning

    3/3

    On one trip to a hole in the wall computer in India, Mitra took the experiment a step further by

    asking a young girl to stand behind a group working on the computer and praise what they were

    doing. He calculated that they achieved 25% more with this positive praise/feedback. The idea of

    showing off your abilities to an empathetic other, Mitra suggested, was like demonstrating your

    skills to your Grannie and your Grannie responding, 'that's amazing. I couldn't have done that at

    your age'.

    That insight led to the recruitment of over 200 volunteers in the UK who connect once a week to

    schools in India via Skype. Their task is to encourage and praise the achievements of the

    youngsters they interact with. It's a coaching and feedback mechanism that integrates with the

    youngster's schooling and which is designed to provide a boost to learning. Whilst not all of the

    volunteers are grannies, the initiative is known after its method 'The Granny Cloud'.

    Mitra further fine-tuned his experiments in Gateshead where he worked with 32 children and

    asked them to work in groups of four using one computer per group. They could change groups,

    wander between groups and even peer over the shoulder at a groups work and take it back to

    their group and claim it as theirs. He then gave the groups six GCSE questions to answer. They

    used everything they could including Google, Newsgroups, Wikipedia, and Ask Jeeves. The

    quickest group answered the questions in twenty minutes and the slowest in forty-five. The

    average score achieved was 76%. The classroom teacher of the groups Mitra was working with

    was suspicious that what the children had achieved was fingertip knowledge, discovering

    information which would subsequently be lost. In order to test the hypothesis that no deep

    learning had taken place during the task, Mitra tested the students with an paper-based exam two

    months later in which no computers nor collaboration was allowed. They scored 76%.