Take the time to read this post carefully, because Jon Dron doesn't waste a single word in this commentary on the OECD report cited in this CBC article. As Dron notes, the report is based on a model developed by Hanushek and Woessman over the years that explains variations in global productivity according to amount and the quality of education people receive, so, less education means less productivity. Right? Well, maybe not. Perhaps greater productivity is caused by other factors. Perhaps the indicators of 'quality education' (like, say the PISA tests) don't measure what they think it does. And "even if their predictions about GDP are correct (I am pretty sure they are not – there are too many other factors at play." But more to the point, he says, "the OECD has a bit of track record on this kind of misinterpretation, especially in education. This is the same organization that (laughably, if it weren't so influential) claimed that educational technology in the classroom is bad for learning." Yes, I remember that.
Today: 0 Total: 1105 [Direct link] [Share]
