[525] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
unkind remarks about K-12
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (bukys@cs.rochester.edu)
Fri Apr 5 03:48:59 1991
Date: Thu, 4 Apr 91 09:17:44 EST
From: bukys@cs.rochester.edu
To: com-priv@psi.com
Gee, in my school district (and, I'll bet, in yours), some students
manage to graduate from 12th grade functionally illiterate.
Now, obviously, money is not the only problem here, but where do you
think more money should be spent -- on teaching fundamental skills, or
buying expensive playthings with no discernable educational purpose?
(I have as yet seen no rationale for this K-12 drumbeating.)
>From where I sit, it looks like the networking marketers simply see
another untapped market, particularly prone to advertising along the
lines of keeping up with the {Jones, Japans, Computers, 21st Century}.
And it certainly helps that this new market has authority to tax.
(So much for "privatization".)
It's funny, for years I've heard (and agreed with) a model of network
expansion called "The Drug Pusher Model", wherein everyone agrees that
networks are good, many departments don't know how good until they have
it, so it's good to subsidize growth in the early stages, in order to
get as many users as possible "hooked".
It is a valid model, insofar as I think that networking is going to
help people within, say, my University, get their jobs done better.
However, all this K-12 activity looks pretty bad to me. I don't think
it will improve K-12 education, I think it will hurt it by diverting
resources from more important things. I'm sorry to see the efforts of
so many people I respect going into an activity with so much potential
for social damage.
If someone can send me a rationale for these K-12 experiments, I will
consider it with an open mind. As it stands, it just looks like
another techno-geek drug pusher standing on the street corner.
Liudvikas Bukys
<bukys@cs.rochester.edu>
