[av_one_full first min_height=” vertical_alignment=” space=” custom_margin=” margin=’0px’ padding=’0px’ border=” border_color=” radius=’0px’ background_color=” src=” background_position=’top left’ background_repeat=’no-repeat’ animation=”]
[av_heading heading=’ The automation of education’ tag=’h3′ style=’blockquote modern-quote’ size=” subheading_active=’subheading_below’ subheading_size=’15’ padding=’10’ color=” custom_font=”]
BY IKE SEÑERES
[/av_heading]
[av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=”]
AT THAT time when the United States of America (USA) set a goal to provide a personal computer (PC) for every public school student, we could have set our own goal to install a computer in every classroom, never mind the student to machine ratio.
At that time, the Americans were aiming to produce the proverbial 100 dollar PC, and fast forward to today, that goal has already been met, albeit in the form of a tablet.
That goal has not only been met by the USA, but all over the world, because it is now possible to buy a tablet everywhere for less than 5,000 pesos.
At that time, the Americans were aiming to connect the classroom computers via Local Area Networks (LANs), but that goal has been made moot and academic everywhere now, because of the arrival of WI-FI technology.
As it is now, it is already possible here in the Philippines not only to put a computer in every classroom, but also to put a tablet in the hands of each and every student. For sure, many critics would say that this option is very expensive, and we should not even consider it.
I wish to remind them, however, that before they should do that, they should first compare it with the costs of whatever it is that they are replacing.
Certainly, we could not say that something is expensive, without comparing it to something else. For purposes of this discussion, it is very clear that we are comparing textbooks to tablets, not one a one two one basis, but it terms of overall systemic costs.
At the outset, I would already say that if we are comparing workbooks to tablets, workbooks would obviously be more expensive because these are purchased brand new every year, while on the other hand, tablets could be procured as a one-time cost only. I have not met the genius who invented the single-use workbooks, but I do remember that I was still able to use a schoolbook that was passed on to me by my two elder brothers.
Again, at the risk of sounding too redundant, I would still say that there is no need to debate whether or not tablets are more expensive than workbooks. Aside from that, the issue about textbooks is practically moot and academic, because reusable textbooks seem to have gotten out of style.
For several decades now, the Department of Education (DepEd) has been chanting the same mantra that they are lacking in classrooms, teachers and schoolbooks. Although coming from another perspective, the Department of Agriculture (DA) is chanting a similar mantra that they are lacking in irrigation, feeder roads and post-harvest facilities.
I do not know when these two departments will stop chanting their age-old mantras, but I know for a fact the problems they are citing are not the real problems, as a matter of fact. I am not saying that we no longer need classrooms and teachers, but certainly there are ways to deal with the problem of supply and demand.
In the case of the DA, I would rather think that the real problem is not irrigation and it is neither feeder roads nor post-harvest facilities. Going straight to the issue, the real problem is management or to be more specific, bad management.
I would be willing to agree that the mantra would be correct if the DA does not get any money from the Congress, but the fact is; they do. In other words, the problem they have is not money but the proper use of the money that they get.
There is really no logical reason for the DA to say that they lack what they lack, but assuming that they are correct, transportation would be a happy problem if there is really good productivity, and so is storage. Irrigation is not a rocket science either, and could even be done with makeshift provisions if there is really an assured market with a good price.
In the case of the DepEd, I will go straight to the point and say that the real problem is bad management, period.
As far as the education budget is concerned, there is not much more that we can do because the Congress is already giving DepEd the most money that it could possibly give, because that is mandated by the Constitution.
The bottom line therefore is for DepEd to maximize the use of the money they get, by getting the most mileage for their bucks, so to speak. As far as I know, there is no better way to do that except to go for automation and online learning.
Perhaps it is also high time for DepEd to realize that they should already combine their online learning and their distance learning programs, because these two should be one and the same now. For sure, the combination of these two programs would lessen the demand for classrooms and teachers./PN
[/av_textblock]
[/av_one_full]
