J. Jorge Carvalhal: There is no distance education
date：2020-06-30 09:47author：小编source：the PÚBLICOviews：
We are still far from being able to assess objectively and to the full extent the damage of various kinds that will be socially felt as a result of the paralysis of different economic, social and cultural activities as a result of the covid-19 crisis.
Apparently less highlighted and debated in the public arena, education is one of the areas of the disaster where the harmful effects of such a strike could have the greatest expression, given the large number and age of individuals affected at all levels of the education system and the repercussions that the school gap will have on the future development of the academic and educational path of so many children and young people.
The effort of all those involved in education, particularly that of teachers, to minimize the negative consequences of school closures and the interruption of classroom activities has been rightly praised, particularly by using and mobilizing technological means to promote so-called distance learning.
The school and the teaching-learning process in person, as we know, however, are irreplaceable for the time being. The sentences that have been pronounced since the middle of the last century about the end of the school until now have been nothing more than lucubration without adherence to reality.
This effort must certainly be praised, but let us stop there. It would be a mistake to start from this experience, tested in an emergency, to defend a new model of education based on distance learning. Communication and the diffusion of information at a distance, today greatly facilitated by technology, are not sufficient to compose, neither from afar nor from close up, the framework of the demands of educational activity and therefore they cannot fail to be considered as mere resources for educational support, especially useful in an emergency such as the one we are experiencing, but without conditions to affirm themselves as an alternative to the school we know.
School, considered in its broadest sense, is both a space and an opportunity for multifaceted growth of individuals and, not least, a space and moment of socialization. This complex function of the school can only be developed in a community of learning, in which students and teachers will be effectively involved.
The educational process only develops adequately within a collective, in an educational community, where there is, moreover, a space and time for personal coexistence and interaction, a relationship of closeness and affectivity, a common standard and rule of conduct, an educational project and a common study plan and, not least, the promotion of fundamental community values such as individual freedom and responsibility, equality, solidarity and citizenship.
Only the face-to-face school, at any of its levels, from pre-school education to university, can fulfill this complex mission. Moreover, as has recently been pointed out, distance learning implies the use of sometimes sophisticated technological means of the market, inaccessible to many of the students, which would make it a factor of social inequalities and, therefore, a threat to one of the noblest objectives of education.
In this, as in everything, what is necessary is not to confuse different realities or see alternatives where they do not exist: face-to-face school is one thing, for the time being, irreplaceable in education; distance learning is another thing, an advanced means of temporarily supplying the school, in situations of exceptionality such as the present one, and, moreover, a very useful resource to satisfy the needs of certain segments of the adult population who, for reasons of a different nature, cannot attend face-to-face education.
Source: the PÚBLICO
https://www.publico.pt/2020/06/27/opiniao/opiniao/nao-ha-educacao-distancia-1921887
Apparently less highlighted and debated in the public arena, education is one of the areas of the disaster where the harmful effects of such a strike could have the greatest expression, given the large number and age of individuals affected at all levels of the education system and the repercussions that the school gap will have on the future development of the academic and educational path of so many children and young people.
The effort of all those involved in education, particularly that of teachers, to minimize the negative consequences of school closures and the interruption of classroom activities has been rightly praised, particularly by using and mobilizing technological means to promote so-called distance learning.
The school and the teaching-learning process in person, as we know, however, are irreplaceable for the time being. The sentences that have been pronounced since the middle of the last century about the end of the school until now have been nothing more than lucubration without adherence to reality.
This effort must certainly be praised, but let us stop there. It would be a mistake to start from this experience, tested in an emergency, to defend a new model of education based on distance learning. Communication and the diffusion of information at a distance, today greatly facilitated by technology, are not sufficient to compose, neither from afar nor from close up, the framework of the demands of educational activity and therefore they cannot fail to be considered as mere resources for educational support, especially useful in an emergency such as the one we are experiencing, but without conditions to affirm themselves as an alternative to the school we know.
School, considered in its broadest sense, is both a space and an opportunity for multifaceted growth of individuals and, not least, a space and moment of socialization. This complex function of the school can only be developed in a community of learning, in which students and teachers will be effectively involved.
The educational process only develops adequately within a collective, in an educational community, where there is, moreover, a space and time for personal coexistence and interaction, a relationship of closeness and affectivity, a common standard and rule of conduct, an educational project and a common study plan and, not least, the promotion of fundamental community values such as individual freedom and responsibility, equality, solidarity and citizenship.
Only the face-to-face school, at any of its levels, from pre-school education to university, can fulfill this complex mission. Moreover, as has recently been pointed out, distance learning implies the use of sometimes sophisticated technological means of the market, inaccessible to many of the students, which would make it a factor of social inequalities and, therefore, a threat to one of the noblest objectives of education.
In this, as in everything, what is necessary is not to confuse different realities or see alternatives where they do not exist: face-to-face school is one thing, for the time being, irreplaceable in education; distance learning is another thing, an advanced means of temporarily supplying the school, in situations of exceptionality such as the present one, and, moreover, a very useful resource to satisfy the needs of certain segments of the adult population who, for reasons of a different nature, cannot attend face-to-face education.
Source: the PÚBLICO
https://www.publico.pt/2020/06/27/opiniao/opiniao/nao-ha-educacao-distancia-1921887
This page by Smart Learning Institute of Beijing Normal University is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.