Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, Instant feedback Accountability the all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5.
[00:00:08] Speaker B: Let me welcome the former president of Tutor to the to the Morning Rumble. Good morning to you, sir.
[00:00:14] Speaker C: Good morning to you, Mr. Murray. And thank you for having me.
[00:00:17] Speaker B: Right, thank you very much. And of course, welcome inside now government has supplied about 73,200 laptops to students from 2010 and 2013 at a cost of approximately 253 million. You know, what are your thoughts and opinions on a whole surrounding these Form 1 students getting these laptops?
[00:00:44] Speaker C: Well, the first question we have to answer is what was the original objective of the One Laptop the trial initially?
We need to be very clear in terms of the objective, whether it was purely political in nature or was it designed as an educational objective to improve student learning outcomes. That's the first thing we have to clarify.
From my memory, the objective wasn't very clear.
Laptops were given out to children when they entered secondary school.
And as the president of Tutorial, first vice president and then president, I would have indicated a number of concerns that we would have had regarding the initiative. We would have identified a number of issues that we would have liked to have seen addressed.
For example, ensuring that the teachers were adequately trained, that there would have been adequate infrastructure and support systems in place to support the use of the devices as a teaching and learning tool.
But that did not materialize in the way we had anticipated.
So the first question we have to ask is, how effective was that initiative from the 2010 to 2015 period?
The government would have taken the decision to revisit that position again now that they have returned to office.
And I am curious about the scientific basis of that decision. The question we have to ask is, was there an evaluation impact of the initiative back then that would justify returning to this position?
The fact of the matter is we can cite a number of studies that would have been done locally which would have indicated that the initiative did not really translate into, into improved student learning outcomes as we had anticipated. Which is why again, we beg the question, what was the original objective of the initiative?
[00:03:21] Speaker B: And you know, with that being said, I thank you for sharing those thoughts.
We had to wonder the objective, and when it looks, when you look at the, at the, at the whole laptop distribution, what benefits do you think was the pros and cons for students receiving this device?
[00:03:39] Speaker C: Well, if laptops are to be deployed as a teaching and learning device, the teacher has to have a certain level of control over the deployment of the devices in the classrooms.
And that didn't Happen we would have advocated for the devices to be given to schools and equip the schools with the proper support system, the infrastructure, the training of teachers, et cetera, so that teachers can actually incorporate the use of the devices in the teaching and learning process.
That didn't happen.
What happened was the children got the devices and they were basically toys.
They were using it for web surfing or for playing games, for pornography.
And within the first year, what we would have found out was that most of the laptops were non functional, they were damaged, they were debased, they were just not doing what I suppose the government had intended so that speakers were not really able to deploy these devices as part of the teaching and learning repertoire. So that when we look at the results of CTEC, for example, let's say the first batch of students 2011 or so, who would have gotten the laptop, they would have passed their CTEC exam in 2016 and onwards. If you look at the CTEC results, if we're using DC theft result as a benchmark, we would have seen that there was no improvement, really no difference in the performance of our students at the CSEC examination.
So again, I am concerned about the rationale that would have been used to inform the decision of the government to revisit that program.
[00:05:39] Speaker B: You know, you mentioned pornography games. From my understanding on the matter is that the laptops, first of all, some research has shown me that it was refurbished products.
That is what I was told. You know, I make one or two calls, call this one, check this one, go. You know, I did have a niece that benefited from it back then and certain sites were bad. So when you got, when the parents got this device, they could not have accessed certain adult websites and so forth.
So I'm not too sure about the pornography. I think the gaming aspects of it was very limited.
But what I wanted to ask you, as you were the head of the time and if, you know, if you think it would have been, what, what sort of infrastructure do you think was necessary? Because if you have these laptops open in class, these are from, these are, these are adolescents, these are 12 year olds, 11 year olds, between 10 and 13 year olds accessing this device for the first time in most instances back then and they have to use this as a teaching tool. What sort of infrastructure lacked for students to thoroughly benefit from this instrument that was given to them by government for learning.
[00:06:55] Speaker C: To clarify the comment I made regarding on office space, what we found out, and this is from my personal experience and I can other teachers and school officials would have had the same experiences is the children were creating their own pornography, they were taking nude photographs of themselves, et cetera, and sharing. So that was the experience that we had.
In terms of the deployment of the devices for teaching and learning. What has to happen is the teacher must be able to, for example, have all the devices networked.
If you have 30 students in front of you with 30 devices as a teacher and you are using that to deliver curriculum, you have to ensure that all the children are seeing the same thing in their screen at the same time, that you don't have distractions, that they can't do whatever they want with the device. While the teaching and learning process is going on, you need the relevant technical support as well. To do that, you need IT technicians, you need infrastructure, you need electricity supplies, et cetera, you need air conditioning rooms so that there's a whole lot of other infrastructure that has to be put in place in order for the devices to be adequately deployed as a teaching and learning tool.
[00:08:17] Speaker B: Because for me, when I look at the, you know, you look at, we adopt the model from foreign classes, universities, law schools overseas, and you see them with their laptops and the devices and so forth. But I think a mainframe should have been, would have been necessary in the school so that teachers, whenever they send work, everybody's devices are connected like a terminal, so to speak. So they show that you're getting the work and it's being done and then the care for these devices, the maintenance work on these, because not every child is articulate to self care and you know, with these type of things. So you have some students very, very meticulous, they'll take care and others it just haphazard. It come in the bag, it shows. So do you think going forward it's practical that government should invest millions into this and yet again fall through the same rhetoric that we did that we saw happening, as you just alluded to some 15 years ago.
[00:09:17] Speaker C: Well, the question we have to ask is what return are we expecting on this investment?
If it's an educational investment, then the initiative is somewhat misplaced. The first thing that must happen is if you want the deployment of these devices as an educational tool, then we need to ensure schools have those devices in their possession so that the devices can be used as a teaching and learning tool across the curriculum. So for example, what I would have done as principal of palace at the secondary, we would have acknowledged early on that all children so the IT literate from Form 1 because we felt that it is practically a life skill. So we took Steps to ensure all our children were exposed to the basics of it. In order to do that we needed to get enough devices in the school. We had two IT labs, we had to install a third lab. With the ppa, we had a third IT lab so each teacher would have also been trained. We had the IT support, the IT technician there and we ensured that whether it's mock, whether it's history, whether it's social studies, edpm, et cetera, all teachers were adequately trained to use the devices, go into the IT lab with their students under control settings and you can use the device now to deliver your kids curriculum regardless of the subject area as well as use the device to conduct assessment. Because we have to remember CTEC as indicated in 2015 or thereabouts, they had a target of 2017 to start CSEC exams using that online modality testing.
Unfortunately they were not able to achieve that target because many of the territories indicated that they were not ready. They believe the infrastructure in place to facilitate the testing. But we recognize this is inevitable and CXP has been pushing the deadline back.
I think next year, January, we are going to try to start with T testing in the January pre tech exam. So we recognize that you need to get teachers, we need to get students all on board with E learning, e testing, etc. But again it has to be done in a controlled way. If you just give the students the device and it becomes their property, then the school does not have that level of control in terms of ensuring the device is deployed as a teaching and learning device. And what we found is that the discipline of the children and their parents were simply not there. They were stopped.
That they will take care of it in the proper manner. That simply did not happen.
[00:12:25] Speaker B: You know one of the things I want to ask you as well in terms of ebooks, all right. You know a lot of students, they don't have the monies to buy these books. Is it that we can. Government could look at getting some of the. When they, when they distribute these laptops, they're pre programmed over at some point they can get access to ebooks online. That's one and two.
The fact that you have taken an approach to IT training of students, could it be looked at that computer classes and I'm saying computer classes, breaking it down in the simplest form. Do you think that that is necessary and should be integrated as part of the syllabus, especially for the entrant those entering the schools? One of the things I recognized many, many years ago is well first of all, let me Allow you to answer and then I'll tell you the reason for asking.
[00:13:20] Speaker C: Well, the fact of the matter is, as I said before in politics secondary, we acknowledge that basic IT skills are life skills. Everyone needs to be familiar with the use of these devices. And we know that the IT technologies are evolving so rapidly. We need to give that opportunity to remain opera with this rapidly evolving technology long after they've left school. So schools have a responsibility to impart those basic skills to the students. Secondly, given the way education is evolving, retesting is a reality in many parts of the world. And like I said, the Caribbean Examination Council has already indicated its intention to go in that direction. So it would be wise for schools to put the necessary systems and structures in place to ensure that we get to that point where you can not just have E learning, but E testing and E learning across the board. E textbooks are one of the many ways in which you can put facilitate E learning. But there are portions that we must be mindful of.
And I will point you to a study that was done by the Swedish government where they reviewed their 2009 decision to go completely the way of e textbooks. And 15 years afterwards they realized that there was some unintended negative outcomes in that decision. So the government of Sweden appointed a technical committee, highly competent people in the areas of E learning, e testing, etc. And they review that decision.
Very responsible on the part of the government to review one of its decisions to go in a particular direction regarding its education reform. And we know Sweden is one of those countries that is renowned for incorporation of cutting edge technology in its education system.
The result of that finding raised a lot of red flags. What they realized there was some unintended negative outcome and that has caused earlier this year the Swedish government to reverse its decision to go the way of E textbooks and return to traditional, traditional textbook. What was some of those unintended negative outcomes? They realized that the younger the child, the concern about over exposure to screens, that became a major issue. They realized that screen deployment alone has a lot of distractions. Children can become very easily distracted.
You have vision issues, you have the issue of poor social development.
Children who are overexposed to screens tend to have very poor interpersonal skills. And we see that play out in the school system. For example, post COVID 19, when children return to schools, we realize a little, a lot, a lot of children just simply could not engage each other. They were, their attention span was very, very sore. They couldn't have meaningful, healthy dialogue and discussion with each other. Every little disagreement would escalate into a verbal conflict and eventually a physical conflict so that teachers have been grappling with that. The outcome of that reliance on screen education during that COVID 19 period and that experience we should not ignore. Going forward, we should be very careful about how we rely on the use of the technology, the use of IT in the education system. There must be that judicious balance between the role of the future traditional curriculum delivery methodologies and the modern technology.
The teacher as the professional must be the one to make that professional judgment false. How and when do I deploy the use of the technology in the education process? Remember, with younger children you have to be very careful about so many things so that that professional discretion must reside with school personnel in terms of how and when the technology is deployed.
[00:18:05] Speaker B: In your respected opinion, do you think much research is necessary at this time before government should take this initiative going forward?
[00:18:16] Speaker C: Well, research, yes. And I think I can point it to the editorial interview yesterday that pointed to three pieces of research that was done locally.
One said the conclusion in one the purpose for which the laptop was intended was unclear to students and owing to the price, owning the device appeared not to make a significant difference in their attitude towards Learning. That's column one, 2014.
Another piece of research concluded that these findings not only suggest that students everyday laptop usage in the classroom is not in alignment with the econnect and learning program goals, and that's Brixton and Blair 2014.
Another one concluded that several barriers to laptop integration are revealed, including maintenance issues, pedagogical challenges and the lack of administrative and technical support that Kamala did in Taipe 2025.
So there has been research already done in the local complex which I humbly submit should be taken into consideration before we decide to expend approximately $100 million per year of this initiative. Again, I'm coming back to what is the original objective of the initiative? We cannot assume that it is about education.
[00:19:59] Speaker B: Well, I think most persons would agree that the initiative would be one where students will have access to these IT devices and bring them more modern in a more modern day school environment.
I must agree that that the feasibility studies probably was needed more. It needed more in terms of rolling out the template.
I think it was a. I think, I continue to think it's a good initiative. But the question, the thing I was thinking is that even if you are exposed to basic IT training computer classes, as we know back in the day, you know, it still gives you basic knowledge when you get into the world of work and you would Agree with me.
What you learn in IT in a classroom, how to operate Microsoft, if you press F1 what it gives you when you start functioning in a business, in a bank, in a credit union or an office space, you then because of your basic IT knowledge or for lack thereof, computer training or computer understanding, it's very easy to train you on various software that the company operates under so that if you press F6 it gives you this window and if you have to navigate from one window to the next. So I think it was a good initiative on that part. One person is saying I went to visit a primary school recently and was appalled to see so little has changed since I left school 40 years ago. Still at the four hours reading, recall writing and arithmetic, all the knowledge information is at your fingertip. Use of knowledge is critical think and critical thinking is what's lacking. And the text that went on to say my daughter's laptop received 14 years ago still works today.
So going forward I think what is needed is infrastructure as we mentioned for teachers. And in conclusion, you know, when it comes to the maintenance aspect of things, from your knowledge, do you think that the government had maintenance in place so that if students laptops for some reason stopped working, they could have taken it to this particular place and have it repaired?
[00:22:16] Speaker C: Students were allowed to bring laptops to school and get the IT technicians to attend to maintenance, but that in reality did not work out that way. A lot of students just never bothered and they would have again used the devices for so many other things. So I don't disagree that giving laptops to people will help to improve their overall IT competency for life later on, I have no problem with that.
My concern is if you want to say this is a device that is going to enhance and improve student learning outcomes, student performance in exams, we need to have a slightly different conversation.
And I am of the firm view that a substantial amount of money is being committed to this initiative.
And if we are talking about improving student learning outcomes, I think the money would be better spent ensuring that all schools, primary and secondary have a certain level of IBN competency capacity that the devices technologies can be incorporated in the teaching and learning process. Teachers are ready and willing to go in that direction, but it has to be at the level of the school. Enough devices must be placed in the school. No problem. You can give devices for students to have as their personal property as well, but don't deprive school schools need devices in palace secondaries. For the last couple of years I haven't had to borrow computers from other schools to facilitate the conduct of physic exams because we simply did not have enough devices in the school, in a secondary school in this day and age. So I am saying, if we're talking about returns on investment in education, these are the things we need to discuss.
[00:24:03] Speaker B: Because I was wondering, and my final question was, do you think that students thoroughly benefited from this laptop distribution program? You know, do you think so?
[00:24:11] Speaker C: Not in the intended manner. Again, the intention was not very clear. If we go back to the 2010-2015 period, I am not sure that the intention was very clear and the research had shown that it was a nebulous political decision that was ruled out at substantial cost to be paid. And unfortunately, it seems we are going back in that direction.
[00:24:40] Speaker B: I thank you very much for chatting with me this morning. The former president of Tutor David Nunson and I want to encourage you to have yourself a very safe day out there. We see what's happening and we urge you to be safe. Thank you so much again for chatting with us.
[00:24:54] Speaker C: You're welcome.
[00:24:55] Speaker B: All right.
[00:24:55] Speaker A: The best insight, Instant feedback, Accountability. The all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5.
