Augmentation, not Replacement…

Erik Duval, , Oct 27, 2013
Commentary by Stephen Downes
files/images/DuvalEyes.JPG

This is a good way of putting the divide I feel between myself and (say) Diana Laurillard:

  • (on the one hand) "could help to address scalability of education – an issue that Diana Laurillard focused on in her talk: if we [can't] automate teachers, then at least we can scale teaching and meet the increasing demand."
  • (on the other hand, we could) "try to focus on ‘augmenting the human intellect’, rather than replacing it [and help] students to look at the traces of their own activities (and those of their peers) in order to steer their efforts in a more informed way."

Better teaching, or better learning? My money is on the latter. (I've probably misinterpreted Duval's original idea; I changed a "can" to a "can't" in the fist point, and may well be drawing the dichotomy in a way he never intended. And I don't refer to his slides at all. But I like this version better.)

Views: 0 today, 90 total (since January 1, 2017).[Direct Link]