[Sussex] Worth a read

[Mark Harrison]

OK, let's try this from another angle:

As you know, I have many (business) interests, and intersect with quite a
range of different groups of people in the average week.

- One of these groups, the IT Community, is convinced that "it would be
better" if EVERYONE understood rather more about how computers worked. They
present compelling arguments how productivity could be improved if IT
literacy were more widespread.

- One of these groups, the Investment Community, is convinced that "it would
be better" if EVERYONE understood rather more about how modern financial
markets and instruments worked. They present compelling arguments how
individual prosperity would be if financial literacy were more widespread.

- One of these groups, the music community, is convinced that "it would be
better" if EVERYONE understood rather more about music. They present
compelling arguments how a culture is ultimately defined by the knowledge it
discovers and the beauty it creates, and how this could be improved if
artistic creativity through music were more widespread.

- One of these groups, the language tuition community, is convinced that "it
would be better" if EVERYONE spent some time each week learning another
culture through its language. They present compelling arguments how many of
the world's problems are due to a misunderstanding of the motivations and
noumena of different groups, and how this could be improved if cultural
awareness through language were more widespread.

... (repeat for any number of other areas)


I am not for a moment saying that increasing IT literacy, per se, is
anything other than desirable. However, it must be recognised that
individual capacity for "learning in a given time" is not infinite... There
are therefore only two ways in which IT literacy could be increased across
the board:

1: Come up with a new way of teaching that improves student learning rates.
(Significant progress has been made in this area already, but it's not
infinite.)

2: Teach IT literacy AT THE EXPENSE OF SOMETHING ELSE.


It would be easy to expand IT literacy by cutting back on, say, foreign
language tuition in schools (for pretty much everywhere outside of Asia,
international commerce is conducted in (American) English, this is even the
case in a French multinational client.)... but is this desirable?

It would be easy to expand IT literacy by cutting back on, say, the study of
history.... geography... music.... fine art.... etc., etc., etc.

Of course, this is a matter of degree, and there will be "basic skills" that
should be taught to everyone, but here's the question - who decides on this?
Is there a consensus? Which of the following are "MUST HAVE" skills for the
21st Century:

- Addition
- Subtraction
- Algebra
- Calculus
- Spelling
- Punctuation
- Grammar
- Debating
- Logic
- A foreign language
- Understanding of a foreign culture
- Citizenship
- Financial literacy
- Doctrine of personal responsibility
- Personal creativity
- Abstract pattern recognition
- Chemistry
- Electronics
- Boolean logic
- The Von Neumann architecture and Turing machines
- Music appreciation
- eMail skills

The question is one of prioritisation... To what extent is it REALLY
necessary to have people learn "about how computers work"... Would it not be
better to teach them how to provide good customer service, or balance a
chequebook, or recognise the difference between a fact and an opinion?

If we believe the profession that is occupational phsychology, then everyone
has a set of natural aptitudes and inclinations which will render them
better at somethings, and mean they find some things more interesting than
others... Should we say that "everyone" should study "how computers
work".... or should we say that "anyone with an aptitude for abstract
reasoning" learns about them... or should we say "anyone with an inclination
to..." learns about them (which is pretty much how the current education
system works.)

Regards,

Mark