Hacker Newsnew | comments | show | ask | jobs | submitlogin

> Newsflash: teaching kids to read is actually much much easier if it's done in the language the kid speaks.

They did not de-fund traditional education to bring in this form of education. If you want to do something to teach these kids their native language's written form, knock yourself out. In the meantime, this is a hell of a lot better than nothing.

Neither are they taking these children away from their family or village. They are introducing a supplemental window into the world. Any knowledge of culture these children could have acquired through verbal communication with their parents will still be transferred. If elements of a culture are willingly abandoned by people when they are exposed to additional sources of culture, those abandoned fragments of culture are not to be mourned.

Were they forbidding local education and preventing the spread of knowledge, then there would be an issue, but that is most certainly not what is going on.




People seem to be hell bend on using whatever straw man is available to defend this effort from any criticism.

"They did not de-fund traditional education to bring in this form of education."

No one said they did.

"If you want to do something to teach these kids their native language's written form, knock yourself out. "

Ad homenim attacks are not a legitimate defense to honest criticism of a policy's inadequacies.

"In the meantime, this is a hell of a lot better than nothing."

Who said it wasn't better than nothing? I'm saying it's a hell of a lot worse than teaching them to read in their own language. Are we seriously going to debate something that obvious or are we just going to keep watering down the goalposts?

"Neither are they taking these children away from their family or village. "

No one has claimed this.

"They are introducing a supplemental window into the world."

So is dropping dictionaries out of the sky. Neither program is above criticism from a cost effectiveness or absolute effectiveness standpoint.

"Any knowledge of culture these children could have acquired through verbal communication with their parents will still be transferred. "

Not making kids worse at talking to their parents seems like an extremely low bar to celebrate.

"If elements of a culture are willingly abandoned by people when they are exposed to additional sources of culture, those abandoned fragments of culture are not to be mourned."

This sort of blanket declaration about cultural genocide may sound great but more often is just vacuous bullshit by the people propagating it. Did Soviet Jews "willingly abandon" their heritage to fit in? Are Tibetans doing the same today? Apparently it's all ok as long as a non-profit company is involved.

"Mrs. Jones, we have good news and bad news. The bad news is the Republicans and Libertarians have finally killed public education. The good news is we have some free tablets for your kids. They're all in Chinese but rest assured your children will still learn some English from their many verbal interactions with you. And if they gradually forget our culture it's no big deal after all it was totally voluntary!"

-----


> cultural genocide

Providing supplemental educational resources to children is not cultural genocide. That is all that is being done in this particular case. I am not claiming that cultural genocide is not real, nor that it is not a problem.

I sought to make this clear in my original response to you; it seems I have failed to communicate effectively.

-----




Applications are open for YC Summer 2015

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | Lists | Bookmarklet | DMCA | Y Combinator | Apply | Contact

Search: