今年施政報告有這樣的一個提議——研發電子課本,作為學子新的學習資源。還以為,這建議又會給議會冷嘲熱諷為甚麼「後知後覺」、「早就要做啦」。豈料,教育界代表居然反對,指電腦屏幕會對眼睛造成很大傷害,擔心所有學生變成「四眼仔女」,則「慳番嘅錢都唔夠醫眼」云云。
依議員之見,只看書,不上網,大概就能保護眼睛吧?那麼,為何未有網可上之時,已是通街「四眼仔女」?電子書果真遺害巨大的話,議員們是否應爭取立法禁止兒童上網,又或設定瀏覽時間的法定上限,以保眼睛健康呢?
網上資訊無限。尤其今天教育界流行通識,單靠印刷文本恐怕追不上時代。電子課本,內容不但可以隨時更新,更可跳出平面框框,不再局限於文字和圖片。 語文書可以讓學生邊讀邊聽,改善發音;歷史書可以播放歷史片段,減少學生打呵欠;地理書可以加插立體圖解,放大縮小任君選擇。 難道,我們還要停留在限時限刻,全班同學肅靜坐定定,老師煞有介事熄燈捲簾,為的就是看《教育電視》的年代嗎? 再者,保護環境,減少用紙,就如日常生活已全方位電子化一樣,是全球大勢所趨,不可逆轉。
要是印刷商反對,還可以理解,但作為民意代表,應該是爭取也來不及吧!街上的政治宣傳牌應速速改為「爭取政府增加撥款為學校添置電腦」才對。始終,電子課本的執行細節、步伐,以至瑣碎至那顯示屏的保護貼等,統統都可從長計議。雖則我們的一下代或許從此只懂打鍵盤而不懂寫字,但世界潮流浩浩蕩蕩,勉強抗拒與時並進,實在短視。
訂閱:
張貼留言 (Atom)
2 則留言:
I would classify that legislator as someone that represents not only the education sector, but also someone that represents the interests of textbook publishers/resellers. If revised textbook editions can be download at the flick of a switch, then it is not hard to imagine a group of people's interests will be affected.
To me those vision problems are just excuses. The legislator in question did in fact protected his constituent's interest, but maybe at the expense of efficiency of the economy and parents pockets.....
In America, one of the city councils in California (as I remembered) is drafting for the purchase of ipad to councilmen.
In long run, students are going to read more electronically so what reasons are the legislator using other than children visual concern?
張貼留言