Russia creating rival to Wikipedia to protect knowledge from ‘erosion’ & fake news

Europe/Russia/13-10-2019/Source and Author: www.rt.com

The Russian equivalent of Wikipedia will become a reliable source for “safe,” verified, data without any ideological or political agenda, and could be accessed by 15 million people a day, its creators said.

The ambitious undertaking, which is powered by the Great Russian Encyclopedia (GRE) publishing house, is going to receive 2 billion rubles ($31 million) in state funding between 2020 and 2022.

The nationwide interactive encyclopedic portal is aimed at protecting contemporary knowledge from “erosion” and sheltering online users from misleading information, GRE communications chief, Anna Sinitsyna, said.

With the avalanche-like growth of all kinds of falsifications (including those in scientific, historical, statistical and demographic data) and fake news, generated by some media and private users online, we see it as a particularly urgent task to create a database of safe information (verified by the scientific community).

All the entries on the portal will be of purely scientific and educational nature, “free of any political or ideological agenda.”

The authors of the project plan to attract an audience of at least 10 million people, which would include students, researchers, civil servants, media people and all those interested in reliable data.

But the site should be capable of handling 15 million unique users on a daily basis. For reference, the stats by Mediascope reveal that the Russian version of Wikipedia was accessed by some 2.9 million people per day this July.

At launch, the 80,000 articles from the Great Russian Encyclopedia, which was published by GRE between 2004 and 2017, will make the bulk of the portal’s content. But it will then be regularly expanded with information from other sources.

Registered users would have a chance to submit articles, but they would only be included on the website after approval by the “expert community” of GRE staff and scientists from other organizations.

With it being a national portal, the articles will be presented in the Russian language, but “the translation of the whole database into some other languages is possible on the initiative of foreign partners.”

BRICS nations (Brazil, India, China and South Africa) as well Iran and Cuba could be interested in the project due to the “English-language encyclopedia Britannica not satisfying them due to its obvious Anglocentrism, especially when it comes to history and culture.”

A tender to provide branding and marketing strategy for the Russian encyclopedic portal has just been announced.

Earlier this year, Russia started working to ensure that ‘Runet’ – the country’s segment of the internet – will remain operational despite a global malfunction or a deliberate internet disconnection by the West. There are plans to create a national DNS system to store all of the domain names and corresponding IP numbers.

Source: https://www.rt.com/russia/470648-russia-wikipedia-knowledge-erosion/

Comparte este contenido:

New Zealand: On the job learning for new teachers a disservice to them and students

Oceania/ New Zealand/ 12.02.2019/ Source: www.stuff.co.nz.

I was very excited to see the outcomes of Bali Haque’s Tomorrow’s Schools Review. It is insightful, clear, and I think, largely correct. I hope we have the courage to implement the review’s recommendations – all bar one.

I don’t believe that school-based teacher preparation pathways will improve the quality of new teachers, and believe it will have a raft of unfortunate consequences for schools and their learners.

Preparing teachers has always been a tricky business. Between 1920 and 2018 there has been a review, a White Paper, a Green Paper, consultation, an advisory committee or report to government on New Zealand’s teacher education  about every 10 years. This despite the shift of teacher education over this period from school-based preparation to training colleges and colleges of education, to universities and private providers.

These reports have the same themes: selection and recruitment, what the content of teacher education should be, where it should be taught, and what the roles of the providers and the profession are in preparing teachers; all similar concerns to those raised by the Tomorrow’s Schools Review.

So is New Zealand particularly bad at teacher preparation? Actually, no. If we look internationally, exactly the same concerns predominate in English-speaking countries around the world. Essentially it comes down to whether you think teaching is a profession or not.

Professions are defined by having an established body of knowledge that is not held by the general population, and therefore require a period of advanced education before they can be practised. Because we’ve all experienced teaching at school in a way that most of us haven’t been exposed to law, accountancy or medicine, some people think there’s not much to it; that it’s basically managing children, a practical «craft» best learned on the job.

If teaching is a profession, advanced preparation is appropriate. If it’s a craft, it could be learned by doing. In practice, of course, it’s both; a highly intellectual activity, characterised by rapid high-stakes decision-making, and a practical task with routines and strategies that need to be mastered.

So which is the right way in: learn the professional knowledge, then practise the strategies, or learn the strategies and then gain the knowledge? I believe it’s a clever combination of the two, and the institutions best placed to develop it are not schools.

But why not? It’s tempting logic, followed by England in  its «School Direct» reform (an employment-based route into teaching). It’s had some successes, but hasn’t solved the variability and supply issues the New Zealand Taskforce highlights.

And a consequence has been the disestablishment of teacher education programmes in higher education, resulting in a loss of expertise in teaching and teacher preparation from the system. Just as the schools discover how hard teacher preparation is, the number of people who could help them diminishes.

Successful schools are good at teaching students. It turns out that teaching adults how to be teachers is actually another task entirely. Putting unprepared people in front of children to «learn as they go» clearly disadvantages those children, and trying to avoid this by preparing, mentoring and evaluating prospective teachers in schools is a serious challenge.

Do we want our schools to be both schools for students and teacher education institutions?

One of the reasons school-based routes appeal is because prospective teachers are paid.

Creating long, unpaid internships as part of teacher preparation reduces the number who can afford to prepare and reduces the diversity of the workforce. Paying people to become teachers is a great idea, we used to do it, but it doesn’t mean that preparation should be led by schools.

I think schools should play a larger role in teacher preparation and be rewarded for doing so. I don’t think, however, that they should be given the whole responsibility because they have another, extremely important, job to do – teaching their students.

In a post-Tomorrow’s School Review system, where supports like advisory services and education hubs are restored, why not retain a highly skilled teacher educator service that is seen as part of the profession, and works closely with schools to provide teacher preparation?

Rather than creating a dual pathway, let’s use all the resources we have to provide quality graduates for New Zealand’s schools.

Source of the notice: https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/education/110510328/on-the-job-learning-for-new-teachers-a-disservice-to-them-and-students

Comparte este contenido:

Interview with Ong Ye Kung: Skills are something that activate your knowledge

In the first of a four-part series, Education Minister Ong Ye Kung explains why he places skills above degrees

A man who places such a high premium on skills over the paper chase does not mind sharing that this year, under his watch, more school leavers will be able to land a place in the local universities.

The cohort participation rate (CPR) – or the proportion of those from this age group making their way to universities – will rise to 37.5 per cent from 35 per cent last year.

Despite the shrinking cohort size, this means the number of those heading to the six publicly funded universities is still higher than last year’s figure and translates to just over 16,000 places.

Between them, they will enrol in over 250 degree programmes, including new courses in emerging fields such as smart city management, data science and artificial intelligence.

Education Minister in charge of Higher Education and Skills Ong Ye Kung, who revealed this in an interview with The Straits Times, says with the increase, the Ministry of Education is well on track to meeting the 40 per cent cohort participation rate that the Government aims to achieve by 2020.

What happens after 2020? Will this figure be relooked? After all, there has been much discussion recently on the Singapore economy needing a more highly educated and skilled workforce.

 Minister Ong says the figure of 40 per cent for 2020 refers only to funded places at the autonomous universities for junior college or polytechnic students proceeding to full-time undergraduate studies before they enter the workforce.
Mr Ong Ye Kung, 48, was elected Member of Parliament for Sembawang GRC in September 2015, and subsequently appointed Acting Minister for Education in charge of higher education and skills.

He was also concurrently appointed Senior Minister of State for Defence.

On Nov 2016, he was promoted to Education Minister (Higher Education and Skills), and concurrently Second Minister in the Ministry of Defence.

Prior to his Cabinet appointment, Mr Ong held the position of director of group strategy at Keppel Corporation, overseeing long-term strategic planning of the group’s activities.

Before joining Keppel, he was the deputy secretary-general of the National Trades Union Congress, overseeing the labour movement’s employment and employability programmes.

He held various positions in the Government earlier.

These include being chief executive of Singapore Workforce Development Agency, where he spearheaded many initiatives to build up the continuing education and training infrastructure.

He was principal private secretary to Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong from 2003 to 2005, and press secretary to Prime Minister Lee from 1997 to 2003.

Mr Ong was also the deputy chief negotiator for the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement.

Mr Ong graduated from the London School of Economics and Political Science with a first-class honours Bachelor of Science (Economics) degree, and holds a Master of Business Administration degree from the Institute of Management Development in Lausanne, Switzerland.

He is married with two teenage children.

POLYTECHNIC OR UNIVERSITY?

It’s hard to say. When I was young, I was always interested in art. I drew comics, superheroes, gongfu characters – so if I were to follow my interests it will probably take me into art – perhaps digital animation. I will look at what course will train me best in those skills, so I will probably go to a polytechnic. If there is a degree in that field, I might go for it, provided it could teach me the skills I need. But having said that, I am also interested in science and maths, and if I go with the flow of what is expected of me, I may take a degree pathway, especially since degrees are still the dominant currency.

MR ONG YE KUNG, on whether he would choose the skills or degree path if he were 18 again and heading to further studies.

It does not take into account those who study part-time for degrees at both the public and private institutions here as well as those who head overseas. If these figures were included, then the proportion of degree holders among an age group is likely to be 50 to 60 per cent, similar to that for many developed countries.

But pressed further, he says: «In time to come, we hope that 100 per cent of Singaporeans will have skills or qualifications that are on a par with having a degree, or even master’s, in terms of job prospects.»

He stands by his constant refrain that Singaporeans should stop believing that university education is the only way to develop an individual’s potential.

«This could be in the form of a degree, a master’s, a specialist diploma, an accumulation of short courses attained in different phases of your life, or just something that the industry knows you are good at, without any paper qualifications. It is about having a high level of expertise, passion and mastery in a particular area, » he says.

Although university degrees are the «currency» to land good jobs at the moment, he stresses that deep skills are what will count for career progression.

He notes that Singapore’s economy has diverse needs and will require diverse talents from a spectrum of expertise. As such, the Government is looking at providing «diverse and multitudinous» pathways for people to build skills.

«Ultimately, it is not about having a degree for its sake, but about skills for work and for life. Throughout their lifetime, everyone should have that depth of knowledge and agility in applying their skills in different contexts. There are many paths to arrive there.

«One dominant path is to study, get a degree and work for the rest of your life. For that, we have a CPR that we plan for. Even in that traditional path, we are trying to make it more varied, through different universities, different teaching methods, different subjects and different domain expertise.»

But he admits that many employers still hire on the basis of qualifications, and this gets in the way of Singaporeans chasing skills instead of degrees.

«I speak to many employers and the bosses all agree with the idea of looking beyond academic results and degrees. Yet, they have not changed their hiring practices significantly. One employer of a fairly big company recently told me that he hires for skills, but when elaborating, he said he doesn’t just go for second upper honours any more… Now he hires graduates with second lower honours as well.»

Mr Ong urges employers to «go through the trouble» and be open to using various assessments and to hire based on skills, so as to find workers with the right fit to grow their businesses.

He goes on to list the important skills – both hard and soft – that all Singaporeans, including graduates, should acquire .

Because technological changes are «turning industries upside down», graduates need to understand the latest technologies and be able to work with them.

«I am not saying you need to be a coder or an IT expert. But it will be good to have a basic understanding of technology and how it can be used in the field you are in.»

With the advance of artificial intelligence, he advises Singaporeans not to be like robots.

«If you work like a robot, you will be replaced by a robot,» he said. In this era we must be «more human than ever – in anything we do», he says, pointing to the fact that AI is not very good at jobs that require creativity, empathy, critical thinking, leadership or artistic expression.

The other force to be reckoned with is globalisation, which is still gathering pace.

«Singapore’s economy will become more connected than ever to the region and the world,» he says. So Singaporeans must aim to take a cue from the expatriate talents coming to the Republic. They must have the hunger and sense of adventure to go out of Singapore and seize opportunities in a foreign land.

And Singaporeans must be able appreciate and operate within different cultures. Mr Ong reminds graduates that with half of their peers holding degrees, they cannot rely on just their qualifications to stand out from the crowd.

«In this landscape, you can no longer say, ‘I am a degree holder and am therefore different from others.’ You have to go beyond that. You have to develop a niche… and be able to sell and present that niche as your area of mastery and differentiate yourself,» he says.

Asked if he would place skills above degrees, he says it need not be one above the other.

«The traditional view is that a degree is above skills, but that is because when we think of skills in Singapore, we think of vocational skills acquired through polytechnic and Institute of Technical Education courses.

«You accumulate knowledge through a degree course, but to convert the knowledge into something useful to society, you require skills. Skills are something that activate your knowledge. From that perspective, skills are above degrees.

«The truth is, both are needed – it is a mesh of what you know and what you can do.»

He stresses that parents, students and employers all need to embrace this larger definition of skills future.

«That’s really the skills we’re referring to in SkillsFuture,» he says, referring to the national movement to harness the aspirations and talents of the population and encourage Singaporeans to keep on learning and upgrading their knowledge and skills.

He hopes that society as a whole will recognise and celebrate the spectrum of success in different fields. » If society sticks to a narrow notion of success, then we will always be stuck in it. Society must embrace them all. Only then will we have true diversity in meritocracy… not just academic meritocracy but a meritocracy of skills.»

In partnership with

By: Sandra Davir.

From: http://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/education/minister-skills-are-something-that-activate-your-knowledge-about-mr-ong-ye-kung

Comparte este contenido: