[plug] MS Curriculum at schools and TAFEs ...

[Simon Scott]

	Nice post :) All true ofcourse.  Good luck with the Education
Minister, but alas he will probably be too busy wasting tax dollars to read
your proposal.

	As for Nick, I think most people here recognize a brick-wall when
they see one. The guy obviously puts zero research into his articles,
otherwise he would never have had to ask on this list. He could have grabbed
a distro and checked it for himself. 

	However it is probably a good idea to let Nick think we know where
he is coming from, otherwise we might be further segregated as 'Linux Geeks'
in his 'column' (I use this word loosely).

	On second thoughts, I disagree with you (ever so slightly) on 1
point. To the average consumer, the OS *is* the apps. Looking at a nice
Gnome Desktop wont get you anywhere without apps. However, I believe if you
look at the small set of applications windows provides by default
(calculator, paint, imaging etc), and the plethora of linux apps on the
install disks, there is no contest whatsoever. 

	Its not like windows installs/apps installs are fault free. Linux
has its little problems sure, but I think people have become so accustomed
to reseting windows after another BSOD that they have learned to forgive its
idiosyncracies. One day they will do the same for Linux.





	From:	Sol Hanna <sol at eftel.com.au> on 23-04-2001 03:08 PM
	Please respond to plug at plug.linux.org.au@SMTP at Exchange
	To:	plug at plug.linux.org.au@SMTP at Exchange
	cc:	 

	Subject:	Re: [plug] MS Curriculum at schools and TAFEs ...

	Hi Pluggers,

	I have been reading these posts with interest and wanted to add my
$0.02 
	coming from a somewhat different angle. (I'm doing a Education &
History 
	double major @ Mudrock).

	1. M$ features heavily in secondary school, TAFE and Uni courses for
a 
	variety of reasons including many, if not all of the above, but for 
	other reasons also. Most teachers and academics are not computer 
	literate (infact in high schools most students are at a higher level
of 
	proficiency than teachers). This general ignorance is a fertile
ground 
	for the Dark Side of the Source (ie:M$) to sow is thorny seeds. In
the 
	case of administrators in schools (and possibly TAFEs and Unis),
they 
	don't go the Open Source solution because they just don't know about
it, 
	and hence they end up paying that taxation on stupidity that is 
	purchasing M$ products.

	NOTE: Given the tight budgetary environment which public schools are

	facing presently, an excellent opportunity (in my opinion) presents 
	itself regarding introducing Linux to the public school system in
WA. To 
	this end I have been planning (when I get some time at the end of 
	semester to put together a proposal to the education minister Mr 
	Carpenter about the advantages of Linux. (I read about a month ago
that 
	a state education department in Mexico, and another in China have 
	adopted Linux across the board.) This might sound futile but I
consider 
	taking action a nice augmentation to complaining loudly and often.
	If anyone comes across any pertinent information (preferably with 
	referenced facts based on research) regarding why Linux is a better 
	option for education departments please email it to me so I can
refer to it.

	2. Teachers/Educationists tend to be convergent thinkers and highly 
	resistant to change. Many on the list already seem to be intuitively

	aware that schooling/education is stuck in a paradigm developed at
the 
	beginning of the industrial era, blissfully unaware that that era
has 
	come to an end. Leading intellectuals in education like Piaget and 
	Vygotsky made strident criticism of educational practices more than 
	fifty years ago (it's a damn shame that some of my lecturers and
tutors 
	don't actually APPLY these principles in class), emphasizing the 
	importance of introducing such elements into curriculum as
metacognitive 
	learning ("learning how to learn").
	How does this relate to Linux? Well because by learning Linux one 
	actually learns principles related to the structure of software (I'm

	sure most of you are familiar with what I mean here). By learning 
	Windoze one is learning virtually nothing - except the lazy,
dependent 
	way of the corporate slave. Hence it is actually advantageous to
learn 
	computer use in a Linux environment because one learns generic
skills by 
	default.

	There seems to be a few Murdoch crew on the list. I am interested in

	ways of turning Murdoch to Linux and have some ideas. Perhaps it
would 
	be worthwhile meeting to discuss, complain, abuse, joke, etc ideas
and 
	the possibility of starting a MurLUG or a Murdoch Chapter of PLUG?
	Any takers?

	Sol

	PS: I think you guys were a little soft on Nick Miller's article. As
an 
	ignorant newbie I don't need to point out that the actual Linux 
	operating system is superior to the Windoze OS (more stable, better 
	security, blah blah blah). Mr Miller's criticism of Linux as I saw
it 
	was based on the lack of applications for Linux thus confusing the 
	operating system with applications. From what little I know about
the 
	whole OS war, etcetera, it seems that Linux has got Windoze
surrounded 
	on most flanks insofar as it is technically superior. All that
stands 
	between Linux and popular acceptance is (a) having more commercial 
	applications being ported to Linux  (b) people seeing through the M$

	propaganda campaign (of which Corporate Tool Nick Miller is a part).
	Am I going too far?



	Simon Scott wrote:

	> 	Yup, but I think youre missing the main point :)
	> 
	> 	To put it simply, it has always been this way. Maybe not
with MS
	> specific curriculum, but in general univerisities no longer are
places for
	> advanced tech. They just teach you how to code ADA, a bit of C, a
little
	> design, and you go and do it in the real world. Never do they
teach
	> free-thought, forward thinking or even a little philosophy. They
simply
	> churn out Java coding clones by the dozen.
	> 
	> 	Whether the curriculum includes MS specific stuff is
irrelevant. The
	> whole system is broken. 
	> 
	> 	Dont get me wrong, I hate MS products, but if unis and tafes
are
	> weak enough to side with MS just for some more $$$s it just proves
my point
	> that I wasted 3 years in what effectively turned out to be an
extended
	> high-school. I went thru in the early 90s and even the cracks were
showing
	> then, and if not for the brilliance of some lecturers the whole
scheme
	> wouldve fallen to shit much sooner. Learning to think was
extra-curricular,
	> not part of the course. As long as you can hack out some small
program in
	> ADA you were right. Question the lecturer as to technique or
alternative
	> solutions? Dont be stupid.
	> 
	> 	In fact, Ive come to the realisation recently that large
sections of
	> what they taught us were just plain wrong. I am especially
questioning the
	> Relational Database paradigm and its utility in solving real-world
problems.
	> Not only that, but with the benefit of hind-sight I am left
wondering why
	> the lecturers tried to drum into us very early 'design is 90% of
the job,
	> the remaining 10% can be done by monkeys with a strong design',
yet only 20%
	> (if that) of the course was centred on design?
	> 
	> 	Anyway, I think you are panicking for the wrong reasons. It
is a
	> much deeper problem which brings into question the independence
(esp from
	> commercial concerns), usefulness and adaptability of most
uni's/tafes. 
	> 
	> 	It does have one positive tho: those of us that have taught
	> ourselves to think independently will always be one step ahead of
the
	> competition :)
	> 
	> 






**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and 
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they   
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify 
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by 
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************