I have a tough job to do. You know, when I looked at the profile of the audience here, with their connotations and design, in all its forms, and with so much and so many people working on collaborative and networks, and so on, that I wanted to tell you, I wanted to build an argument for primary education in a very specific context. In order to do that in 20 minutes, I have to bring out four ideas -- it's like four pieces of a puzzle. And if I succeed in doing that, maybe you would go back with the thought that you could build on, and perhaps help me do my work.
我眼前有個難題 當我看到現場觀眾的背景資料 有著各式各樣的樣式及涵義 加上許多人已經 有著我想要向大家分享的協作及人際網路等工作經驗 我想要提出一項小學教育的論述 明確地來說 在20分鐘內說清楚來龍去脈, 我必須提出四個構想 就像是四片拼圖 如果我能成功的把這四個構想說清楚 也許能讓你們回去慢慢想 能夠如何在我的計畫基礎上再發揚光大
The first piece of the puzzle is remoteness and the quality of education. Now, by remoteness, I mean two or three different kinds of things. Of course, remoteness in its normal sense, which means that as you go further and further away from an urban center, you get to remoter areas. What happens to education? The second, or a different kind of remoteness is that within the large metropolitan areas all over the world, you have pockets, like slums, or shantytowns, or poorer areas, which are socially and economically remote from the rest of the city, so it's us and them. What happens to education in that context? So keep both of those ideas of remoteness.
第一片拼圖是偏遠性 及受教育的品質 當我說偏遠性, 有二到三種不同的意思 當然, 通常當人們說偏遠性, 他們指的是 離起點越來越遠 從市中心到偏遠的地方 那對教育來說又怎麼樣呢? 第二種不同的偏遠性 是在世界上各個大型都會區內 有某些區塊, 如貧民窟, 陋巷或是比較窮的社區 與都會區內其他地方在社會及經濟方面 有差距(偏遠性), 變成我們與他們兩個群體 這樣來說教育又會是怎麼樣的背景下呢? 於是我們從這兩種偏遠性的概念出發
We made a guess. The guess was that schools in remote areas do not have good enough teachers. If they do have, they cannot retain those teachers. They do not have good enough infrastructure. And if they had some infrastructure, they have difficulty maintaining it. But I wanted to check if this is true. So what I did last year was we hired a car, looked up on Google, found a route into northern India from New Delhi which, you know, which did not cross any big cities or any big metropolitan centers. Drove out about 300 kilometers, and wherever we found a school, administered a set of standard tests, and then took those test results and plotted them on a graph. The graph was interesting, although you need to consider it carefully. I mean, this is a very small sample; you should not generalize from it. But it was quite obvious, quite clear, that for this particular route that I had taken, the remoter the school was, the worse its results seemed to be. That seemed a little damning, and I tried to correlate it with things like infrastructure, or with the availability of electricity, and things like that.
我們做了一個假設:偏遠區域的學校裡 師資不夠好 如果有良好師資, 學校無法長久留住這些人 它們的基礎建設不夠好 就算具備部份基礎建設 它們也無法輕易維持正常運行狀態 但是我想要驗證這個假設是否正確. 所以去年 我們雇了一輛車, 査了Google 找了一條從新德里到北印度的小路 這條路途中並不會經過任何大城市 或任何大型都會區. 大概300公里的路程中 只要找到學校, 我們就會主持一項制式的測驗 然後把成績結果畫成圖表 這份圖表很有趣, 雖然需要仔細推敲 因為樣本數太少了, 不應該一概而論 但是結果很明顯也很清楚 這條我們走過的路途中 越偏遠的學校, 測驗成績越糟 這結果似乎有點令人沮喪 我試著找出與之有相關性的事物, 如基礎設施 或是供電能力等等
To my surprise, it did not correlate. It did not correlate with the size of classrooms. It did not correlate with the quality of the infrastructure. It did not correlate with the poverty levels. It did not correlate. But what happened was that when I administered a questionnaire to each of these schools, with one single question for the teachers -- which was, "Would you like to move to an urban, metropolitan area?" -- 69 percent of them said yes. And as you can see from that, they say yes just a little bit out of Delhi, and they say no when you hit the rich suburbs of Delhi -- because, you know, those are relatively better off areas -- and then from 200 kilometers out of Delhi, the answer is consistently yes. I would imagine that a teacher who comes or walks into class every day thinking that, I wish I was in some other school, probably has a deep impact on what happens to the results. So it looked as though teacher motivation and teacher migration was a powerfully correlated thing with what was happening in primary schools, as opposed to whether the children have enough to eat, and whether they are packed tightly into classrooms and that sort of thing. It appears that way.
我很驚訝的發現, 這些都沒有相關性 成績與班級大小無關 與基礎設施品質無關 與貧窮程度沒有關聯. 就是無關 但後來我發了一份問卷 給這些學校, 問老師們一件事: 你是否想要搬到城市或都會區? 如你所見的69%的老師答了是 他們說想搬到德里邊緣, 離德里不遠的地方 但是他們並不想搬到德里的富人區 因為這些富人區的居民都比較富裕 除此之外, 離德里200公里以外之後的老師一致性地回答是 我想一個老師每天來學校 都在想:真希望我現在在其他學校任職 這情況也許對前面說的測驗結果有著重大的影響 所以看起來教師的動機及教師的遷徙 與小學教育現況有著強烈的相關性 相反的, 孩子們是否有東西吃 及教室內人數多寡 等等的, 看起來與測驗結果並無相關
When you take education and technology, then I find in the literature that, you know, things like websites, collaborative environments -- you've been listening to all that in the morning -- it's always piloted first in the best schools, the best urban schools, and, according to me, biases the result. The literature -- one part of it, the scientific literature -- consistently blames ET as being over-hyped and under-performing. The teachers always say, well, it's fine, but it's too expensive for what it does. Because it's being piloted in a school where the students are already getting, let's say, 80 percent of whatever they could do. You put in this new super-duper technology, and now they get 83 percent. So the principal looks at it and says, 3 percent for 300,000 dollars? Forget it. If you took the same technology and piloted it into one of those remote schools, where the score was 30 percent, and, let's say, took that up to 40 percent -- that will be a completely different thing. So the relative change that ET, Educational Technology, would make, would be far greater at the bottom of the pyramid than at the top, but we seem to be doing it the other way about.
說到教育與科技, 我發現到 像是網站, 協作環境啦等新理念 你們從上午就一直在聽的東西 一直都是在最好的學校先行測試, 城市裡的最好學校 然後在我看來, 導致了偏見 有份文獻...一部份科技文獻 一貫地批評教育科技(ET)成效被誇大了而且一直達不到要求 教師們永遠都說, 這很好, 但是太貴了 因為試行的學校中,裡面的學生早就已經體驗過這些科技 這樣說好了,也許現在他們能做到80% 加上最新最好的科技, 現在他們能得到約83%效益 所以校長就會說 3%就需要30萬元? 算了吧 如果把同樣的科技拿到偏遠的學校裡做測試 假設原本測驗成績是30%, 用了科技之後成績達到40% 那這又是另外一種狀況了 所以教育科技(ET)能夠帶來的相對效益 在金字塔底層效益會比金字塔頂端要來的大得多 但是我們現在做法似乎背道而馳
So I came to this conclusion that ET should reach the underprivileged first, not the other way about. And finally came the question of, how do you tackle teacher perception? Whenever you go to a teacher and show them some technology, the teacher's first reaction is, you cannot replace a teacher with a machine -- it's impossible. I don't know why it's impossible, but, even for a moment, if you did assume that it's impossible -- I have a quotation from Sir Arthur C. Clarke, the science fiction writer whom I met in Colombo, and he said something which completely solves this problem. He said a teacher than can be replaced by a machine, should be. So, you know, it puts the teacher into a tough bind, you have to think. Anyway, so I'm proposing that an alternative primary education, whatever alternative you want, is required where schools don't exist, where schools are not good enough, where teachers are not available or where teachers are not good enough, for whatever reason. If you happen to live in a part of the world where none of this applies, then you don't need an alternative education. So far I haven't come across such an area, except for one case. I won't name the area, but somewhere in the world people said, we don't have this problem, because we have perfect teachers and perfect schools. There are such areas, but -- anyway, I'd never heard that anywhere else.
所以我的結論就是ET應該要 先用在下層社會,而非上層社會 最後問題來了, 如何改變教師的看法 只要你去找教師並且告訴他某種科技 他的第一個反應是 你不能用一台機器取代一位老師--這是不可能的 我不懂為何那是不可能的, 但是, 就算是一下子也好 假設那是有可能的--我在科羅拉多預見的科幻小說作家Arthur C. Clarke爵士 說過一句話 他說的話能完全解決這個問題 他說,如果一位教師能被機器所取代,那就應該那樣做 所以, 老師就很難當了, 你必須思考 不管怎麼樣, 我認為一份特殊的小學教育 不管如何另類, 應該是那所學校原本沒有的 應該在學校排名不夠好, 教師不夠多 或是不管什麼原因, 師資不夠好的學校裡實施 如果你正好住在一個上述種種都不存在的地方 那你就不需要特殊教育 到目前為止, 除了一處以外, 我還沒找到那樣的地方,但我不會說是哪裡 但是世界上總會有人說, 我們沒有這樣的問題 因為我們有完美的教師與完美的學校 有這樣完美的地方, 但是在此之外, 就再也沒聽過了
I'm going to talk about children and self-organization, and a set of experiments which sort of led to this idea of what might an alternative education be like. They're called the hole-in-the-wall experiments. I'll have to really rush through this. They're a set of experiments. The first one was done in New Delhi in 1999. And what we did over there was pretty much simple. I had an office in those days which bordered a slum, an urban slum, so there was a dividing wall between our office and the urban slum. They cut a hole inside that wall -- which is how it has got the name hole-in-the-wall -- and put a pretty powerful PC into that hole, sort of embedded into the wall so that its monitor was sticking out at the other end, a touchpad similarly embedded into the wall, put it on high-speed Internet, put the Internet Explorer there, put it on Altavista.com -- in those days -- and just left it there.
我現在要說說小孩與自我組織能力 還有一系列實驗顯現了 特殊的教育或許會成什麼樣子 這組實驗稱為"牆上的洞" 我必須加快速度了. 這是一組實驗 第一項是1999年在新德里執行的 這個實驗其實蠻簡單的 當時我在市中心貧民窟附近有一個緊鄰貧民窟的辦公室 在我們辦公室與貧民窟中間有一道分隔牆 在那道牆上鑽了一個洞 所以實驗名為牆上的洞 然後我們放了一台性能強大的PC在洞裡, 有點嵌入牆裡的感覺 所以電腦螢幕在另一端會突出來 一個觸摸屏同樣類似的嵌入牆裡 接上高速網路, 加上Internet Explorer 連到Altavista.com--當時--然後就擺著不管它
And this is what we saw. So that was my office in IIT. Here's the hole-in-the-wall. About eight hours later, we found this kid. To the right is this eight-year-old child who -- and to his left is a six-year-old girl, who is not very tall. And what he was doing was, he was teaching her to browse. So it sort of raised more questions than it answered. Is this real? Does the language matter, because he's not supposed to know English? Will the computer last, or will they break it and steal it -- and did anyone teach them? The last question is what everybody said, but you know, I mean, they must have poked their head over the wall and asked the people in your office, can you show me how to do it, and then somebody taught him.
這是我們觀察到的 所以這就是我的IT辦公室. 就是牆上的洞計畫 大約八小時後我們發現一個小孩 右邊這個八歲小孩 他左邊是一個六歲身材矮小的女孩 他正在教這個女孩如何用瀏覽器 這個發現讓我們產生了更多的問題 這是真的嗎? 語言是否是一個變因? 因為他不應該認得英文 電腦是否能撐得住, 或是會不會被弄壞或被偷走 還有有人教他們嗎? 每個人都會問最後的那個問題 那些小孩一定把頭伸過牆這邊來 並且問了你們辦公室的人 可不可以教我怎麼用, 然後有人教了他們
So I took the experiment out of Delhi and repeated it, this time in a city called Shivpuri in the center of India, where I was assured that nobody had ever taught anybody anything. (Laughter) So it was a warm day, and the hole in the wall was on that decrepit old building. This is the first kid who came there; he later on turned out to be a 13-year-old school dropout. He came there and he started to fiddle around with the touchpad. Very quickly, he noticed that when he moves his finger on the touchpad something moves on the screen -- and later on he told me, "I have never seen a television where you can do something." So he figured that out. It took him over two minutes to figure out that he was doing things to the television. And then, as he was doing that, he made an accidental click by hitting the touchpad -- you'll see him do that. He did that, and the Internet Explorer changed page. Eight minutes later, he looked from his hand to the screen, and he was browsing: he was going back and forth. When that happened, he started calling all the neighborhood children, like, children would come and see what's happening over here. And by the evening of that day, 70 children were all browsing. So eight minutes and an embedded computer seemed to be all that we needed there.
所以我把同樣的實驗帶出德里去 這一次到了印度中央一個城市叫做Chifpuri 在這個地方我可以確認沒有人會教任何人任何事 (笑聲) 在一個溫暖的一天, "牆上的洞" 裝在一座老舊的房屋上. 這是第一個到那裡的小孩 後來我們得知他是一個13歲的輟學生 他開始玩弄那個觸摸屏 很快的他發現當他再觸摸屏上移動手指 螢幕上的東西會動 後來他告訴我"我從沒見過可以自己動的電視機" 還可以做事情 他自己就摸索出來了, 花了他兩分鐘 他就發現他做什麼這台電視機上面就怎麼動 然後當他這樣玩時, 他不小心點了 觸摸屏一下--等會兒你會看到 像這樣, 然後Internet Explorer就換頁面了 八分鐘之後, 他眼睛從看著他的手到看著螢幕 而且他正在瀏覽頁面:來來回回的 就在這個時候, 他開始呼喚鄰居小朋友過來 就像小孩會圍過來看這裡在幹什麼 到了當天傍晚, 總共有70個小孩在上網 所以看起來就只需要 八分鐘及一台嵌入牆裡的電腦
So we thought that this is what was happening: that children in groups can self-instruct themselves to use a computer and the Internet. But under what circumstances? At this time there was a -- the main question was about English. People said, you know, you really ought to have this in Indian languages. So I said, have what, shall I translate the Internet into some Indian language? That's not possible. So, it has to be the other way about. But let's see, how do the children tackle the English language? I took the experiment out to northeastern India, to a village called Madantusi, where, for some reason, there was no English teacher, so the children had not learned English at all. And I built a similar hole-in-the-wall. One big difference in the villages, as opposed to the urban slums: there were more girls than boys who came to the kiosk. In the urban slums, the girls tend to stay away. I left the computer there with lots of CDs -- I didn't have any Internet -- and came back three months later. So when I came back there, I found these two kids, eight- and 12-year-olds, who were playing a game on the computer. And as soon as they saw me they said, "We need a faster processor and a better mouse." (Laughter) I was real surprised. You know, how on earth did they know all this? And they said, "Well, we've picked it up from the CDs." So I said, "But how did you understand what's going on over there?" So they said, "Well, you've left this machine which talks only in English, so we had to learn English." So then I measured, and they were using 200 English words with each other -- mispronounced, but correct usage -- words like exit, stop, find, save, that kind of thing, not only to do with the computer but in their day-to-day conversations. So, Madantusi seemed to show that language is not a barrier; in fact they may be able to teach themselves the language if they really wanted to.
我們以為這就是這樣了 團體裡的小孩可以教育彼此 如何用電腦及如何上網. 但是需要在什麼樣的情況下呢? 這個時候有一個關於英語的疑問 有人說, 這個實驗真的應該要用印度語 我就說了, 哪種, 是要我把整個網路都翻譯成某種印度語言? 那是不可能的 所以應該是另一種做法 但是, 我們想想, 這些小孩怎麼掌握英文呢? 我把實驗帶到印度東北部 一個叫做Madantusi的村落 在那裡, 並沒有英文老師 所以小孩一點都沒學過英文 然後我佈置了一個類似的牆上的洞 在村落與在城市貧民窟一個很大的不同 來的小孩里, 女生比男生多 在程式貧民窟 我在電腦旁留了很多CD--那裡沒有任何網路 三個月後再回去看 當我回去那裡時, 我發現這兩個小孩 8歲跟12歲, 正在電腦上玩一個遊戲 而且當他們見到我時就說 我們需要更快的處理器跟更好的滑鼠 (笑聲) 我非常驚訝 他們到底怎麼知道這些東西的? 然而他們說, 我們是從CD上學到這些東西的 我說, 你們怎麼研究出那裡在做什麼? 他們說, 你留了這台機器 只會講英文, 所以我們必須學英文 後來我量了一下,他們可以用200個英文字相互溝通 --發音不正確, 但是用法正確-- 像是:退出, 停止, 尋找, 儲存, 那樣的字 不僅是在與電腦有關時, 更在他們日常生活對話中 所以Madantusi似乎體現出語言不是一個障礙 事實上, 他們還能自我學習這種語言 如果他們想要的話
Finally, I got some funding to try this experiment out to see if these results are replicable, if they happen everywhere else. India is a good place to do such an experiment in, because we have all the ethnic diversities, all the -- you know, the genetic diversity, all the racial diversities, and also all the socio-economic diversities. So, I could actually choose samples to cover a cross section that would cover practically the whole world. So I did this for almost five years, and this experiment really took us all the way across the length and breadth of India. This is the Himalayas. Up in the north, very cold. I also had to check or invent an engineering design which would survive outdoors, and I was using regular, normal PCs, so I needed different climates, for which India is also great, because we have very cold, very hot, and so on. This is the desert to the west. Near the Pakistan border. And you see here a little clip of -- one of these villages -- the first thing that these children did was to find a website to teach themselves the English alphabet.
最終我有些經費來測試這個實驗 看看這樣的結果是否可複製, 在其他地方是否也會是一樣的 印度是一個很好的地方來做這種實驗 因為我們很多樣化 有多樣化的種族 還有各式各樣的社會經濟多樣化群體 所以我能夠選取跨群體的樣本 基本上能夠涵括全世界 五年之後, 這個實驗 帶領我們在印度走透透 這是喜馬拉雅, 在北邊, 非常冷 我還得確定或是發明某些裝置 讓普通PC能夠抵擋得住戶外環境, 印度更是有著各種不同的氣候 我們有著極寒冷的地方也有酷熱的地方 這是西邊的沙漠, 靠近巴基斯坦邊境 你可以看到, 在某個村莊 這些小孩首先做的就是找到一個網頁 來教他們自己學英文字母
Then to central India -- very warm, moist, fishing villages, where humidity is a very big killer of electronics. So we had to solve all the problems we had without air conditioning and with very poor power, so most of the solutions that came out used little blasts of air put at the right places to keep the machines running. I want to just cut this short. We did this over and over again. This sequence is also nice. This is a small child, a six-year-old, telling his eldest sister what to do. And this happens very often with these computers, that the younger children are found teaching the older ones.
到了印度中部--很溫暖, 潮濕的漁村 這裡的濕度對電子設備損害很大 所以我們必須解決問題 空調與電力都是很缺乏的 所以大多是以少量的風力散熱 來讓電腦持續運作 我想先跳過這些, 因為我們一直重複著這實驗 這一段很有趣. 這個小孩六歲 教他姊姊怎麼用 這樣的情況經常發生 年紀小的小孩教年紀大的小孩
What did we find? We found that six- to 13-year-olds can self-instruct in a connected environment, irrespective of anything that we could measure. So if they have access to the computer, they will teach themselves, including intelligence. I couldn't find a single correlation with anything, but it had to be in groups. And that may be of great, you know, interest to this group, because all of you are talking about groups. So here was the power of what a group of children can do, if you lift the adult intervention.
實驗結果告訴我們什麼? 在一個設計好的環境內 6歲到13歲的小孩可以自我學習 我們能衡量的因素對結果都沒有影響 所以只要他們能接觸電腦, 他們就能學習 我找不到任何變因是與結果有關聯的, 但我想應該跟"團體"有關 而且它們對在座的各位來說相當重要 因為你們都在討論團體 這裡顯示如果排除成人的介入 一群小孩聚在一起能夠迸出何種火花
Just a quick idea of the measurements. We took standard statistical techniques, so I'm going to not talk about that. But we got a clean learning curve, almost exactly the same as what you would get in a school. I'll leave it at that, because, I mean, it sort of says it all, doesn't it? What could they learn to do? Basic Windows functions, browsing, painting, chatting and email, games and educational material, music downloads, playing video. In short, what all of us do. And over 300 children will become computer literate and be able to do all of these things in six months with one computer.
讓我快速說一下衡量標準 我們用了標準的統計方法, 所以我不會贅述 但是我們得到了一個完美的學習曲線 幾乎就像是你在學校裡會經歷的一樣 我就不再多說 因為我想, 大家都可以了解了, 對嗎? 他們可以學到什麼? 基本的Windows功能, 瀏覽, 小畫家, 即時通及email 玩小遊戲及教學課程, 下載音樂及看影片 簡而言之, 我們平常用電腦做的事情 這樣一來300個小孩都能成為電腦高手 都能在6個月內用一部電腦做上述的所有的事情
So, how do they do that? If you calculated the actual time of access, it would work out to minutes per day, so that's not how it's happening. What you have, actually, is there is one child operating the computer. And surrounding him are usually three other children, who are advising him on what they should do. If you test them, all four will get the same scores in whatever you ask them. Around these four are usually a group of about 16 children, who are also advising, usually wrongly, about everything that's going on on the computer. And all of them also will clear a test given on that subject. So they are learning as much by watching as they learn by doing. It seems counter-intuitive to adult learning, but remember, eight-year-olds live in a society where most of the time they are told, don't do this, you know, don't touch the whiskey bottle. So what does the eight-year-old do? He observes very carefully how a whiskey bottle should be touched. And if you tested him, he would answer every question correctly on that topic. So, they seem to be able to acquire very quickly.
他們到底怎麼做到的? 如果你去算他們使用電腦的時間 結果是每天平均才幾分鐘 所以不是使用時間的問題 實際上是一個小孩操作電腦 然後通常會有3個其他的小孩圍在旁邊 指噵這個小孩怎麼操作 如果給他們考個試, 四個人都會回答相同的答案 這四個人身旁又通常會圍繞著16個小孩 他們也會插嘴下指導棋 通常跟電腦相關的指導棋都是錯的 而且他們每個人也都能通過跟PC相關的考試 所以他們看著學也通過實際操作來學 看起來與成人下意識學習的方式相反 但是請記得, 八歲小孩通常都被教育 這個不能做, 那個不能做 不要碰威士忌的瓶子 所以八歲小孩子做些什麼呢? 仔細觀察該如何碰威士忌酒瓶 而且如果你問他 他能夠正確回答這個話題相關的問題 所以他們似乎能快速吸收
So what was the conclusion over the six years of work? It was that primary education can happen on its own, or parts of it can happen on its own. It does not have to be imposed from the top downwards. It could perhaps be a self-organizing system, so that was the second bit that I wanted to tell you, that children can self-organize and attain an educational objective.
那這超過六年來的實驗工作的結果為何? 就是初級教育可以很自然發生 或是部分能很自然自主發生 不需要上而下的推動 也許就是一個自己組織起來的系統 第二件事我想告訴大家的是 小孩能夠自行組織並且達到教育目標
The third piece was on values, and again, to put it very briefly, I conducted a test over 500 children spread across all over India, and asked them -- I gave them about 68 different values-oriented questions and simply asked them their opinions. We got all sorts of opinions. Yes, no or I don't know. I simply took those questions where I got 50 percent yeses and 50 percent noes -- so I was able to get a collection of 16 such statements. These were areas where the children were clearly confused, because half said yes and half said no. A typical example being, "Sometimes it is necessary to tell lies." They don't have a way to determine which way to answer this question; perhaps none of us do. So I leave you with this third question. Can technology alter the acquisition of values? Finally, self-organizing systems, about which, again, I won't say too much because you've been hearing all about it. Natural systems are all self-organizing: galaxies, molecules, cells, organisms, societies -- except for the debate about an intelligent designer. But at this point in time, as far as science goes, it's self-organization. But other examples are traffic jams, stock market, society and disaster recovery, terrorism and insurgency. And you know about the Internet-based self-organizing systems.
第三件事與價值有關, 同樣的, 我必須簡述 我在分布在印度各地超過500個小孩身上做了測試 問他們--我給了他們約68種不同 價值取向的問題, 並問他們他們的想法 我們得到了不同的看法. 是, 否或我不知道 我把其中50%答案是是的, 還有50%答案為否的挑出來 有16個 這些就是很明顯小孩感到困惑的說法 因為一半說是一半說否 其中典型的是, 有時候說謊是必要的 他們不知道如何回答這樣的問題 也許我們也都不知道 那我問你們這第三個問題 科技是否能改變價值觀的形成? 最後, 自行組織的系統 我一樣不用多說 因為你們早就聽過了 自然界的系統都是自行組織的 銀河, 分子, 細胞 生物, 社群等等 都是自行組織的, 除非還要討論關於一個有智慧的造物主的辯論 但是今時今日, 科學上來說 都是自行組織的 但是有其他的例子如塞車, 股市, 社會 及災難重建, 恐怖主義及攻擊 還有你知道的網上的自行組織的系統
So here are my four sentences then. Remoteness affects the quality of education. Educational technology should be introduced into remote areas first, and other areas later. Values are acquired; doctrine and dogma are imposed -- the two opposing mechanisms. And learning is most likely a self-organizing system. If you put all the four together, then it gives -- according to me -- it gives us a goal, a vision, for educational technology. An educational technology and pedagogy that is digital, automatic, fault-tolerant, minimally invasive, connected and self-organized. As educationists, we have never asked for technology; we keep borrowing it. PowerPoint is supposed to be considered a great educational technology, but it was not meant for education, it was meant for making boardroom presentations. We borrowed it. Video conferencing. The personal computer itself. I think it's time that the educationists made their own specs, and I have such a set of specs. This is a brief look at that. And such a set of specs should produce the technology to address remoteness, values and violence. So I thought I'd give it a name -- why don't we call it "outdoctrination." And could this be a goal for educational technology in the future? So I want to leave that as a thought with you.
我總結為四句話 偏遠性影響教育的品質 教育科技必須率先被引進偏遠地區 然後再到其他區域 價值觀是自然形成的, 教義跟信條是後天強加的 這兩個是相對的 而教育應該是自行組織的系統 對我來說總結四項結果 給了我們一個教育科技的一個目標及遠景 一個數位化的自動的教育方式 能夠容忍出錯, 簡易, 能相互聯絡的, 自行組織的 身為教育工作者, 我們不需要爭取科技 我們只需要借 PowerPoint應該是一個偉大的教育科技 但是它不是為了教育存在的, 它最初是被用來做董事會報告的 我們借用了. 視訊會議. PC也是一樣 我想應該是教育工作者自己開發的時候了 我有一套. 剛剛已經簡略帶大家看了一遍 這一套標準應該催生科技 來把偏遠性, 價值觀及暴力考慮進去 所以我想我應該替它命名--不如叫它"非教條"吧 而且如果這會是未來的教育科技 我想要與各位分享
Thank you.
謝謝
(Applause)
掌聲