75% of the people think government should fund advance technology in early childhood programs!
Today, we discuss the results of the survey I asked y'all to fill out recently. In case you missed that, it's here.
I picked my questions based on the designated horizon reports about NMC technology trends in Nordic School. To cumulate what I learned, I wanted to see how much people think about having a balanced curriculum between Arts and Science in schools. As well as, what they believe is most important for innovation and economic bolstering. I also wanted to know if many people had experienced a 3D printer and at what level should our government provide funds for advanced technical materials for school.
To my excitement, the vast majority of responders think that Arts should be creatively imbedded with Science! Finally, Arts and Science, can be friends. They'll work well together, don't you think? Great, we can now move towards a STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics) vs STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) curriculum.
3D and virtual assistance weren't so popular as I thought. So, I'm not the only one in the world who hasn't used a 3D printer then. People were torn between which drives the Economy more, the Science or the Arts. I guess, it’s okay to say both drive the economy equally. Well, well, well, most people also think that government should fund early childhood and secondary schools with new and advanced technology for learners. I guess the 3 - 5 year olds may get to rock with more than I-pads. I agree, our early childhood programs definitely need rich technical learning equipment to catch them young. When the use of technology is directly for quality learning and innovation, children can acquire great skills for creativity and innovation.
Which result surprised you the most?
Leave a comment.