Interview with Andrew Keen, author of “The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet is Killing Our Culture”.
In my mind that is antithetical to education – the entire “the-teacher-does-not-know-more-than-the-
student-thing”. It will cause the entire premise of education to break down. On the other hand, the teacher should be a friend and not the one who tells the pupils what to do – that is totally wrong.
Andrew Keen: Essentially, my book suggests that if you do away with the editor, you do away with the ecosystem of traditional media, whether it be the editor, the teacher, the agent or the publisher. Doing away with these valuable media contributors is disastrous because you need gatekeepers for value. Without them, the dynamic will lend itself to corruption. So again, in my mind, undermining these values doesn’t help the development; it only helps new oligarchies to emerge. Even worse, these oligarchies in the Internet are often anonymous.
 |
1 comment:
je to zajimavy clanek, skoda, ze nemam po ruce tu knihu...
Autor podle mne predklada (dost mozna umyslne, aby byl zajimavejsi)
problem moc vyhrocene a extremne a argumentuje manipulativnim zpusobem. Uplne byl nepomijel ani to, ze autor je medialni podnikatel, tedy spise "stara skola".
Napr. jeste jsem nevidel zadneho rozumneho "evangelistu" E-learning 2.0, tvrdit, ze "the teacher does not know more than the students" nebo ze ucitele ve veku Web 2.0 nebudou rikat zakum, co maji delat. To je hloupost, mozna prave naopak,
v dobe Net-Generation je informaci a moznosti tolik, ze studenti jsou za dobrou orientaci prinesenou ucitelem vdecni.
Na druhou stranu vyuka by mela byt zalozena na formalnim ci neformalnim kontraktu, dohode, mezi ucitelem a zakem a rozumna dohoda prece nemuze byt sestavena jen jednou stranou (ucitelem), ale musi se na jejim obsahu podilet i student.
Zase je to obecnejsi trend, protoze podobne se zacinaji chovat i jine oblasti, kde se prechazi od "spravnich", autoritativnich (asymetrickych) vztahu ke "smluvnim" rovnopravnych).
Na druhou stranu ja mnohe jeho obavy chapu, mne se obecne zplostovani medii, hlavne pokud jde o dostupnost a tvorbu kvalitniho obsahu, taky nelibi. Spravne podotyka, ze Web 2.0 ovsem neni pricinou, ale produktem/nasledkem obecnejsiho trendu.
Nakonec TV porady jako Big Brother, SuperStar a podobne, jsou stejne
povahy, kdy obsah/dej tvori z velke casti ucinkujici muzi a zeny "z lidu" -- a to je presne ten "kult amaterismu", jak o nem pise. Vetsina z ucinkujicich totiz nic moc neumi a "dobri" jsou jen proto, ze se o nic vi :-)
Celkove vzato, muj pohled na Web 2.0 (ve vzdelavani i obecne) to moc nezmenilo -- a slyset jiny nazor nakonec taky patri k veci.
Post a Comment