Economist Debate

I have been following with much interest the Economist Debate which had the proposition 'Social networking technologies will bring large ( positive) changes to education methods, in and out of the classroom'. The pro view has been strongly put by Ewan McIntosh and the con by Michael Bugeja. The debate is now over with a resounding win for Ewan's pro stance of 62% to 38%. The wonder of the debate was the number of comments and participants from all over the world expressing views that gives me much optimism for the future for our young people. What needs to happen now is the debate and discussion needs to be turned into action and the education leaders in countries around the world need to be directed to the debate and they need to listen and do.

The time has come the walrus said to talk of many things - 'Alice in Wonderland' - Lewis Carroll

Procrastination is not an option ... the longer we wait for action the more our young learners will become disenfranchised by our institutional systems and the harder it will become to support and help them in their quest for a personalised education process.

PS

Ewan McIntosh the 'pro' speaker has added a comment to his own blog which has caused me some disquiet. I have complete belief in the proposition of the debate and recognise the strength of his argument but fall short of agreeing with him about the voting. I do actually think that in this sort of online environment that there will be a 'swing' towards a 'pro' vote for any discussion based on the forward thinkingness of any online ideas ( sorry just can't think of a better word than ideas at the moment). The people who engage in these debates and those who watch from the sidelines are, I feel, at this time, going to be those that are media/network and (obviously) online savvy. They have found their way to an online debate and are involved in it. People who perhaps would be interested in the debate but do not regularly engage in online interactions are (!!) just not represented and I have the feeling that they would be veering towards the 'con' camp.

This is no way detracts from the power and strength of the argument and the quality of the posts in discussion. Just let's not get too hooked up on the votes cast.