The nuance of education 3.0 caters to the unfocused economic objective of industrization. With minimal innovation at the education forte, it wouldn be an exaggeration to assert that we are largely generating “human resource” than to foster human potential.With the advent of the 4th industrial revolution largely governed by auto bots, the relevance to have a set education outcome in a conformed routine of institution and school needs to be the epicenter of discussion.
Furthermore with the digital shift and following the trends of innovation in the 1st world country in a 3rd world scenario. It has thus been predominantly noticed that the delivery of a redundant curriculum across the globe fails to meet a path of what is expected out of the learners to retrofit an “international student ” albeit 21st century approach. The structured system of turning classrooms into active learning spaces therefore requires further investigation. A perpetual shift from mundane pedagogy methodology to that of a connectivist, fluid and liberal, as opposed to constructivists, has left the education futurist wondering if the learners will respond to anything less stimulating. If so how sustainable will the model be?
Learners exposed to a digitally stimulated environment for a longer period of time; mostly personalized and adhering to the taxonomy of “creating” (maker movement), are intolerant to be satiated with anything less simulative in n number of cases,learners get bored easily. As it is no longer essential to retain information, as any learner could be decipher and learnt over this uncontrollable connected world via smartphones other mediums.
The challenge would then be, to formulate a curriculum to address the emergent shift from the demands to create a sustainable and “stimulated global resource material”? why does one need school/schooling y the way? Who shall adopt a reliability engineering model in education and economy at large per se? mostly who shall represent the “global curriculum”?