3 ms·
You just need to break it down into theoretical and application. They need both. You need to allow the passive consumption of the material in variety. That way
by Glitch-Anomaly 2y ago
You just need to break it down into theoretical and application. They need both. You need to allow the passive consumption of the material in variety. That way one can watch the video, another might read the passage, and some might do both. Then there needs to be an open-ended opportunity to apply their theoretical understanding with enough creative leeway to attach it something meaningful to their personal experience. Otherwise, it doesn't matter if its AI, another kid, online answers, or even just rote memorization. You won't be "teaching" them anything other how to be a subservient lower class feed bag for the upper middle to high class capitalists. You also have to give more than two shits about students than you do concerning monetizing and selling edu tech software.
- nutanc 2y agoAgreed. I think there are enough tools that "explain" a concept. Not enough tools to apply those concepts and test. Good point. Also agree on giving two hoots about students. This is one of the reasons edtech generally is hard to monetize. If you monetize, you come off looking like making money off kids. If you don't monetize,how do you make the best product. I think the Khan academy approach of a non profit makes the most sense. Commercialization of education through edtech has had disastrous effects atleast in India(ex: Byjus etc)