Попытки удешевления образования («повышение эффективности») ведут к понижению качества, т.е. к ухудшению образования. Дёшево делается только дешёвка. Называется это «макдональдизация».
fundamental truth is that technology to advance learning can be great, as long as that technology is a complement - and not a substitute - for a well-trained and fully-supported educator.
In short, nothing matters more than the professor.
Основополагающая истина заключается в том, что технология для обучения может быть отличной, если эта технология является дополнением, а не заменой — для хорошо подготовленного и во всех отношениях поддерживаемого и обеспечиваемого педагога.
Короче говоря, нет ничего важнее, чем профессор.
We need to somehow come to grips with the fact that quality education will always be an educator-intensive activity, and therefore will always be expensive.
Нам нужно как-то сжиться с тем фактом, что качественное образование всегда будет интенсивной деятельностью педагога, и поэтому всегда будет дорогостоящим.
The Efficiency Paradox: What Big Data Can't Do Hardcover – Deckle Edge, April 17, 2018
by Edward Tenner (Author)
A bold challenge to our obsession with efficiency--and a new understanding of how to benefit from the powerful potential of serendipity
Algorithms, multitasking, the sharing economy, life hacks: our culture can't get enough of efficiency. One of the great promises of the Internet and big data revolutions is the idea that we can improve the processes and routines of our work and personal lives to get more done in less time than we ever have before. There is no doubt that we're performing at higher levels and moving at unprecedented speed, but what if we're headed in the wrong direction?
Melding the long-term history of technology with the latest headlines and findings of computer science and social science, The Efficiency Paradox questions our ingrained assumptions about efficiency, persuasively showing how relying on the algorithms of digital platforms can in fact lead to wasted efforts, missed opportunities, and above all an inability to break out of established patterns. Edward Tenner offers a smarter way of thinking about efficiency, revealing what we and our institutions, when equipped with an astute combination of artificial intelligence and trained intuition, can learn from the random and unexpected.
What’s wrong with efficiency? Well, when it comes to education, there’s a growing realization that it might be kryptonite.
A provocative new book called “The Efficiency Paradox” argues that the dream of making education more efficient (in other words, cheaper) is impossible, or at least that it can’t be achieved without reducing quality. And the author, independent scholar Edward Tenner, also celebrates the staying power of low-tech tools that work as study aids despite their stubborn inefficiency—like paper notebooks, pens and pencils. He says the drive to achieve digital models of efficiency (in several sectors, not just in education), is taking attention away from interventions that work, like paying good teachers to teach (and maybe giving them tech to be even better). (Hat tip to Joshua Kim’s review of the book.)
Meanwhile, a growing scholarly critique offers an even broader look at the downsides of chasing educational efficiency. The argument bemoans a “McDonaldization” of higher education, in which leaders apply practices from business to classrooms to bring efficiency, predictability, calculability and control to the academic process. While the attempts are often well-meaning, they can backfire and stifle creativity, the argument goes.
Even those who disagree with these champions of inefficiency should at least pay attention, since the views appear to be held by plenty of professors these days