6 ms·
> Namusobya from ISER said she believes BIA causes segregation between the poor and rich. She said in government-run schools every child is treated equally, but
by DailyHN 10y ago
> Namusobya from ISER said she believes BIA causes segregation between the poor and rich.
She said in government-run schools every child is treated equally, but BIA's model only targets the poor.
Not sure that I'm seeing the problem here... since when are the rich jealous of the poors' education?
And here is the bit where Gates/Zuck benefit (possibly now, certainly in the future):
> You have technology -- like tablets -- often standing in place of teachers...
Gates/Zuck [could] make more money selling tech to these schools (probably not through tuition, though, because it's only $6/month).
[I see the benefits being long-term edu foothold, not short-term profiteering]
Edit: Added edits in [].
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- jhanschoo 10y agoThe name-dropping of Gates and Zuck helps the western reader relate to pretty domestic Ugandan news. Whereas it helps attracts views, I wonder exactly to what extent the two billionaires and their interests are involved in BIA.
- Veen 10y agoDoubtful. I'm not fan of Gates or Zuckerberg, but they can invest their money with a much higher return than is likely to be achieved in the Ugandan private education industry. Even people who generally do the wrong thing can do the right thing sometimes - and Gates in particular has demonstrated this. Sure, contributing to reducing malaria deaths means more potential windows users, but it's a bit of a tenuous link.
- DailyHN 10y agoAre you saying that you do not see the massive opportunity that is establishing a foothold in school systems in developing countries? More specifically, Facebook owns Oculus which puts them in one of the best positions to replace schools/teachers with technology/VR.
- DailyHN 10y agoAdditionally, I'm not saying I disagree with Gates/Zuck. I'm sure they only have good intentions.
- ryanlol 10y agoSeems like normal monitors might be a far easier solution than VR.
- DailyHN 10y agoMonitors still require a physical presence in the local area(building + substantial energy source). On the other hand, a single VR device can last a student for years and it doesn't require travel to-from class.
- icebraining 10y agoThe substantial energy source is a benefit, not a drawback. It's much easier and cheaper - and therefore faster - to power a single building than to extend the grid to every house. Remember, less than 20% of Uganda homes have electricity. As for the building, it costs $55k to build a full school in Uganda for 325 kids, complete with library and offices. Assuming it lasts for 20 years with minor repairs, that's ten cohorts of students, so 3250, which means $16 per student.
- the_af 10y agoI find the thought of replacing schools and teachers with technology and VR a scary dystopia. It seems we've gone a long way... in the wrong direction, I suppose. For example, the consensus in Sci-Fi used to be the other way: people like Bradbury and Asimov imagined nightmare scenarios were kids were taught by futuristic devices, and the implication was that human contact with actual teachers mattered; that exposure to other people with different opinions -- who might even get angry at you -- was a good thing; that education is a social thing, not a mere transference of "content". Of course there's a lot to fix in education, but why would one root for an educational system in the hands of corporations and practiced by replacing everything with tech?