A few weeks ago the Economist came out with Ed tech is profitable. It is also mostly useless (paywalled, natch, but this link points to the archive version). In this response Nik Bear Brown offers a definitive rebuttal, going so far as to say the Economist misrepresented the Stanford survey article behind the report (also behind a paywall). "The Economist cherry-picked a single sentence from a nuanced 40-page meta-analysis and inverted its conclusion." So what should the Economist have reported instead? "The best adaptive systems - intelligent tutors, AI-powered feedback, targeted practice platforms - are the most cost-effective intervention in education... But here's the tragedy: these high-quality systems represent maybe 5-10% of current ed tech spending. The other 90% goes to: Generic devices (Chromebooks, iPads) that enable distraction, low-quality 'drill and kill' software, platforms optimized for engagement metrics, not learning transfer, (and) administrative overhead and IT support."
Today: Total: [Direct link] [Share]
