Full Version: High School 2.0
From CNN:
Keeping in mind:
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
QUOTE
After three years of planning, the Microsoft Corp.-designed "School of the Future" opened its doors Thursday, a gleaming white modern facility looking out of place amid rows of ramshackle homes in a working-class West Philadelphia neighborhood.
The school is being touted as unlike any in the world, with not only a high-tech building -- students have digital lockers and teachers use interactive "smart boards" -- but also a learning process modeled on Microsoft's management techniques.
The school is being touted as unlike any in the world, with not only a high-tech building -- students have digital lockers and teachers use interactive "smart boards" -- but also a learning process modeled on Microsoft's management techniques.
Keeping in mind:
QUOTE
"Philadelphia came to us ... and asked us to design a school,"
The company didn't pay the $63 million cost -- that was borne by the Philadelphia School District -- but shared its personnel and management skills
The company didn't pay the $63 million cost -- that was borne by the Philadelphia School District -- but shared its personnel and management skills
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
Public schools should implement the best practices available. Some school models are failing some children. Sometimes you need to try a radical idea, even if it fails, to get closer to a workable solution.
If the goal of high school is to create people with skills that are attractive to business, then of course business should at least have a seat at the table for deciding what (and how) to teach kids.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Technology is a part of society. Low tech classrooms are a thing of the past (or soon will be).
My kids' school just put Smart boards in every classroom (thanks to an anonymous grant). The pilot program they had last year indicated that it was a big help and somebody donated the $12-15,000 needed to get these boards in every room. Teachers can prepare lessons ahead of time and lay them out, instead of wasting time writing out problems on the board. If nothing else, it's a time saver.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
Interesting phraseology. Are these mutually exclusive?
I think we should implement best practices, as I mentioned before. If a school system comes up with an idea (such as this one) that works well, then it should be exported to different systems. If it crashes and burns, we avoid it. Of course, the public school system in the US is fragmented, with myriad local interests and egos. This much easier said than done.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
I think we should model schools closer to how things function in the real world. I think that includes allowing the use of reference materials, but still have tests timed. My reasoning here is that in the real world, nobody solves a problem using only the information in their head. You consult references to make sure you are on the right track.
Of course, in elementary schools, where basic skills are being developed, a non-corporate approach is needed. Teaching thinking skills and rote memorization are still needed in the lower grade levels.
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
Let's just hope there are no "Blue Screens of Death".
Public schools should implement the best practices available. Some school models are failing some children. Sometimes you need to try a radical idea, even if it fails, to get closer to a workable solution.
If the goal of high school is to create people with skills that are attractive to business, then of course business should at least have a seat at the table for deciding what (and how) to teach kids.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Technology is a part of society. Low tech classrooms are a thing of the past (or soon will be).
My kids' school just put Smart boards in every classroom (thanks to an anonymous grant). The pilot program they had last year indicated that it was a big help and somebody donated the $12-15,000 needed to get these boards in every room. Teachers can prepare lessons ahead of time and lay them out, instead of wasting time writing out problems on the board. If nothing else, it's a time saver.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
Interesting phraseology. Are these mutually exclusive?
I think we should implement best practices, as I mentioned before. If a school system comes up with an idea (such as this one) that works well, then it should be exported to different systems. If it crashes and burns, we avoid it. Of course, the public school system in the US is fragmented, with myriad local interests and egos. This much easier said than done.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
I think we should model schools closer to how things function in the real world. I think that includes allowing the use of reference materials, but still have tests timed. My reasoning here is that in the real world, nobody solves a problem using only the information in their head. You consult references to make sure you are on the right track.
Of course, in elementary schools, where basic skills are being developed, a non-corporate approach is needed. Teaching thinking skills and rote memorization are still needed in the lower grade levels.
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
Let's just hope there are no "Blue Screens of Death".
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
Certianly, in fact there was a bill introduced in Congress a while ago covering this subject. As long as they are not writing the textbooks (bill gates is your master, bill gates is your master, bill gates isss yooouuurrrrr)
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
I don't see why it would lower the quality, it would only increase the amount of information they have access to within a certian amount of time, therefore improving the quality of education (I dont have any studies to back this up). For example, the internets would of course tap them into a large amount of information. I know I have learned many things from the internets, including off of this message board.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
What Amlord said, but would also like to add that his head does not have much hair on it. That is all.
Certianly, in fact there was a bill introduced in Congress a while ago covering this subject. As long as they are not writing the textbooks (bill gates is your master, bill gates is your master, bill gates isss yooouuurrrrr)
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
I don't see why it would lower the quality, it would only increase the amount of information they have access to within a certian amount of time, therefore improving the quality of education (I dont have any studies to back this up). For example, the internets would of course tap them into a large amount of information. I know I have learned many things from the internets, including off of this message board.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
What Amlord said, but would also like to add that his head does not have much hair on it. That is all.
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
I don't see why not. Corporations turn out school books and supplies and most other things associated with education material. This sounds like a valid attempt to create a new school prototype using a corporation that is both at the cutting edge of technology and has had success in revolutionizing an existing model before (corporate structure)
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Technology in itself does not improve the quality of education. But being exposed to modern technology is a positive thing for students as they are being educated.
My school is going through a very expensive and time consuming shift to having every student in the school have a tablet pc (toshiba) and have projectors installed in every class. We have kind of moved past the Smart Board, although I like Smart Board technology very much and my students enjoy using it too.
I think the results will be mixed at first and I think they will be positive in the medium and long run.
It takes a conscious effort, and it takes being planned correctly. These things are often much more difficult than they sound. When you make teachers dependent on technology in the classroom then system crashes add another way learning can be disrupted during the day.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
I think we should be open to change in the evolutionary and revolutionary models. But the revolutionary model should have a lot of field testing on the small scale before it starts being applied across large systems.
Evolutionary changes are more for tweaking and refining the present models. However, the more consistent the results in public education are bad the more often we will have backers of revolutionary change.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
LOL
I don't see why not. Corporations turn out school books and supplies and most other things associated with education material. This sounds like a valid attempt to create a new school prototype using a corporation that is both at the cutting edge of technology and has had success in revolutionizing an existing model before (corporate structure)
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Technology in itself does not improve the quality of education. But being exposed to modern technology is a positive thing for students as they are being educated.
My school is going through a very expensive and time consuming shift to having every student in the school have a tablet pc (toshiba) and have projectors installed in every class. We have kind of moved past the Smart Board, although I like Smart Board technology very much and my students enjoy using it too.
I think the results will be mixed at first and I think they will be positive in the medium and long run.
It takes a conscious effort, and it takes being planned correctly. These things are often much more difficult than they sound. When you make teachers dependent on technology in the classroom then system crashes add another way learning can be disrupted during the day.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
I think we should be open to change in the evolutionary and revolutionary models. But the revolutionary model should have a lot of field testing on the small scale before it starts being applied across large systems.
Evolutionary changes are more for tweaking and refining the present models. However, the more consistent the results in public education are bad the more often we will have backers of revolutionary change.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
LOL
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
If a corporation wants to manage a school, then the corporation should pay for the cost of building and running the school.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
I don't think so. Learning school material usually consists of reading and typing reports. To do those 2 things, you only need a library and a typewriter.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
Global business competition is not only an educational issue. If America continues running up large trade deficits and large government debt, good jobs are going to vanish from America regardless of our education system.
If a corporation wants to manage a school, then the corporation should pay for the cost of building and running the school.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
I don't think so. Learning school material usually consists of reading and typing reports. To do those 2 things, you only need a library and a typewriter.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
Global business competition is not only an educational issue. If America continues running up large trade deficits and large government debt, good jobs are going to vanish from America regardless of our education system.
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
Yep. All input should be considered when designing teaching practices in public schools.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Both in and out of the classroom. I search my public library's catalog online before heading down there to check out real books. I still like real books. They're easier to handle than the electronic versions.
I also like having calculators and conversion programs at my fingertips. Another nice thing is the growing store of photos of various places. Very handy for a writer.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
Model education after corporate management techniques? What does that mean? Which techniques and what corporations? Do you really want the English class to do a hostile takeover of the math class, or vise versa, downsize the classrooms and ship the desks overseas?
I don't think corporate management is a good educational model at all. However, teaching management classes would be a good idea, kind of like teaching religion in philosophy and history classes. In fact, corporate management does involve a lot of philosophy, history, and what I've come to call nonfiction fantasies.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
Actually, what you want to create are graduates who are able to compete in a global business environment. Teach the global business environment.
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
All new ideas need to be tested out before taking them on. This, however, is not a new idea. Remember apprenticeships? I don't think that focusing only on management techniques will lead to graduates able to compete in a global economy. They might make good Microsoft serfs.
Yep. All input should be considered when designing teaching practices in public schools.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
Both in and out of the classroom. I search my public library's catalog online before heading down there to check out real books. I still like real books. They're easier to handle than the electronic versions.
I also like having calculators and conversion programs at my fingertips. Another nice thing is the growing store of photos of various places. Very handy for a writer.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
Model education after corporate management techniques? What does that mean? Which techniques and what corporations? Do you really want the English class to do a hostile takeover of the math class, or vise versa, downsize the classrooms and ship the desks overseas?
I don't think corporate management is a good educational model at all. However, teaching management classes would be a good idea, kind of like teaching religion in philosophy and history classes. In fact, corporate management does involve a lot of philosophy, history, and what I've come to call nonfiction fantasies.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
Actually, what you want to create are graduates who are able to compete in a global business environment. Teach the global business environment.
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
All new ideas need to be tested out before taking them on. This, however, is not a new idea. Remember apprenticeships? I don't think that focusing only on management techniques will lead to graduates able to compete in a global economy. They might make good Microsoft serfs.
Should corporations be able to help model the design and teaching practices of public schools?
Don't private firms already help formulate teaching methods and facility designs? I don't really understand this question, because there appear to be subtle implications being made here. Are you asking if school boards can ask corporations for help? If so, I say yes and believe they already do.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
This depends on the objectives of using technology.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
Without something more quantifiable here, it would be difficult to choose.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
We don't create students, rather we educate citizens. I would say that involving industry is part of the equation of education. Teachers and school boards need to stop monopolizing the content of school curriculums. They are not qualified to be the sole arbitors of the subjects of a good
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
Don't private firms already help formulate teaching methods and facility designs? I don't really understand this question, because there appear to be subtle implications being made here. Are you asking if school boards can ask corporations for help? If so, I say yes and believe they already do.
Does technology in the class room improve the quality of education?
This depends on the objectives of using technology.
Should we change our school system through evolution (take the way we teach students now and make it better) or revolution (change the way we teach students ie: model it after corporate management techniques)?
Without something more quantifiable here, it would be difficult to choose.
What do we need to do in order to create students who will be able to compete in a global business environment? Is this a step in the right direction?
We don't create students, rather we educate citizens. I would say that involving industry is part of the equation of education. Teachers and school boards need to stop monopolizing the content of school curriculums. They are not qualified to be the sole arbitors of the subjects of a good
Will their be green screens or blue screens? Should we wait till Service Pack 1 to implement this idea?
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.