To understand why Mr Trump's 1461 day presidency to end of 2020 was likely to be the most dangerous whomever ruled the wavelengths, BRI.school invites you to co-edit a 7 minute read on a short history of world trade in millennium 2 - see far right column. In Moore's laws maths -this period's exponential rise breaches singularity - for first one computer chip has more switching/analytic capacity than the human brain's cells- tenmoore.com - The Games

  1. trump's 1461 days were natures, AI, SDG destiny's and most dangerous presidency this month's 3 greatest risks to under 30s goodwill webs and english-language edu- brexit, n korea and huawei (see keynesian analysis in next tweet)

INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION 4 : special china thanks: BRI Belt Road IQ -need custom guide rsvp chris.macrae@yahoo.co.uk normanmacrae foundation, DC-text 240 316 8157
Main reason for optimism is leapfrogging - thats when a society/place that was excluded from industrial age networks leapfrogs an old system to a new one thanks to 1000 times more COMstech than 1946; about a third of the world never had wired telephone lines, now almost all have mobile (text version); more than a quarter of the world never had electricity grids, now microsolar is linking in;. Prior to 2017 only Jim Kim open spaced this debated in DC: let's hope all parents and youth do now from usa to china to Rome, from Scotland to Argentina, from Bangalore to Haiti. from . G1 G2. Join Valuetrue.com and QBG -does your place have a JYK to celebrate global youth? futures of Liberty 1 & education 1
1:08 #2030now 3.19
0:39 0.31 1:40 1:02 1.21
...joy jk search 1........ co
Which is your top 100 jim kim video vote for end-poverty tedx wcg..Jim Kim2030nowjimkim2transcripts.doc2030nowjimkim.doc, where world demands women manage poverty why not development?
http://www.tedxwbg.com/ Sources for millennials Happy 2015 dialogues of pih on 1 Ebola 2 how to leverage technology to radically engage patients on health care; UN is 2015 year of all change to sustainability goals... support economistmooc.blogspot.com
Even as the 1960s moon race inspired the world, we need to understand how unequal the opporttunity to innovate had been - even in the 1960s as many as half the world's people had no access to electricity grids so they got their news of the moon race by word of mouth.

Consider 1000-1500- until the last few years of this period , the known world was Europe-Asia and NE Africa; #BR8 the med sea was the main world trade waterway; places facing this sea increasingly developed win-win trades; moreover #BR7 the west asian border to med sea was the start of an amazing overland relay of traders which stretched all the way to china (the silk road was the greatest overland world trade route ever and to sustain its interfacing markets required positive cross-cultural bridging all along its route. Silks and spices from the Chinese end acted like a positive currency- there was much demand for them whose value naturally went up the further they were merchanted back to Europe. Everyone gained for this trading route- you can read marco polo's diaries- perhaps nowhere invested more in artistic celebrations of being a major hub of positive trade than his hometown venice in europe and the town he was asked to govern for 2 years in china Hangzhou which marco described as the great town of markets in the world.)

What happened towards 1500 that 2 long shipping routes were discovered by north europeans- the new world of the ameriucas to the west (#BR6 N, #BR10 what we now call Latin America), and a way of reaching the @BR2 South Asian coastal Belt (starting with the indian subcontinent) by sailing around africa. A ship captain couldnt affird such a long return voyage unless he goit what trade he wanted- soon this big ships were equipped with gun power and crews were pressganged or even enslaved. Next in the process was colonising. So it was that nations became big by pludering economies of other peoples places. Back in 1500 places economic size was corelated with population. Soon Britain grew at the expense particularly of the Indian subcontiuent. Mainly Britain and France colonised Africa too, Spain andPotrtugal colonised Latin America. North America was settled by a mixyure of Europeans whose declaration of Indendence in 1776 ended any attempt by Britain to colonise America, But we should note that the USA was built on a sort of internal colonisation - natives had theor places taken over and slaves were used to do most of the hard labour. In effect the old war's colonial ways casued the 2 world wars of the fkirst half of the 20th C. From 1946 most of the world's countries regained their independence but starting from (mainly undeveloped states - poverty that the colonia era had gtraped them in).

Ironically whule the UDA came to tghe resuce of the old workld and from 1946 helped relaunch the two biggest losers of world war 2 Germsny and Japan, american (not withstandiong thair family trees origins) had previously had little modern of knowledge of Eurasia but were pulled into peacekeeping and the cold war with russia through the sceond half of the 20th C. Whilst there was some understanding of the extraoerdinary progress japanese enginers made with electornics, civil and other enginnering, the rise and rise of the east and the often difficult bodrers that had been caused by British and Jpoanese colonisation of the region are not deeply studied by most Americans or their media. It should be the best news the world has ever seen that the fifth of the world in chjna tghat closed itself to the world for more than a centiry after Brfits has offered opium as a gtrading currency in 1860 is now as entrepreneurial as anywhere. With over half of tghe world's ;people facikng either the sout asia or east asia coastal belts, the opportunity the east is cfreating to win0pwin gtrade oin line with moore's ever increasing technology should make sustainable youth worlwdie the gfreatesty positive curency-invetsment the human race has ever mapped. But this is not how USA or the block of coungtriues ruled by the Euro have marketed transapfrently. Instead we are caught in the Keynsian crisis of economist not valuing the hippocratic oathes he had published as tghe final chapter of the ngeneral throy of employment money and interest. The 2020s are likely to make the system designs our tech spreads irreversible- will the end game be big brother extinction or little sister sustainability?

Thursday, January 26, 2017

day 6 -why would anyone want to give aid to countries blocking bridges international

Touch-screen teaching

Emerging markets should welcome low-cost private schools


An East African crackdown on Bridge International Academies is hopelessly misguided

MORE than 250m children in developing countries are not in school. Those who do attend often fail to learn anything. According to one study of seven African countries, primary-school pupils receive less than two-and-a-half hours of teaching each day; teachers are absent from class about half of the time. Even when they show up, theirs is a Potemkin pedagogy, lecturing to nonplussed pupils. Only about a quarter of secondary-school pupils in poor countries would reach the basic level of attainment on standardised international tests.
Into this void have stepped low-cost private schools. For a few dollars each month, they give parents an alternative to the public sector. Such schools are common—about 1m of them are scattered across developing countries—but until recently this has been a chaotic cottage industry of tiny, unregulated providers. Only now are private chains emerging, offering the promise of innovative education at scale. The prospect of change ought to be embraced. Instead, it is being fought.
One chain in particular has attracted opposition. Since it opened its first branch in 2009, Bridge International Academies has expanded to run 520 schools across Kenya, Uganda, Liberia, Nigeria and India. To keep costs low, the firm uses one of three standard templates to build its schools; it makes its uniforms, textbooks and furniture in-house. To keep standards high, its teachers read from scripted lessons on a tablet computer. Remote teams use data from these devices and pupils’ test scores to monitor the quality of teachers. Investors include Bill Gates, Mark Zuckerberg and the development-finance arms of the British and American governments.
Advertisement
Bridge continues to open new schools. But its overall pupil numbers are below their peak. This is as a result of roadblocks in its two biggest markets, Kenya and Uganda. Teachers’ unions there criticise Bridge for often hiring unlicensed teachers; they also argue that the chain funnels money away from public education. In Uganda the government has said that it would shut Bridge’s 63 schools on the ground that the company expanded without receiving permission from the Ministry of Education. (Bridge is lobbying the Ugandan government to try to stay open.)
Such concerns stretch beyond east Africa. Education International, a global group of teachers’ unions, accuses the firm of “robbing students of a good education”. But the worries about private education providers in poor countries are either overblown or solvable. One fear is that they could end up replacing a public monopoly over education with a private one. Given the state of the education system in many countries, that would be a nice problem to have. It is also wildly premature, if only because the business model remains unproven (see article). And governments have plenty of ways to foster competition. They could introduce school vouchers or conditional cash transfers for parents to spend on eligible schools. Liberia is running a randomised controlled trial in which eight different private operators run publicly funded schools.
Another worry is that companies have an incentive to flout sensible regulations in their desire to gain scale. The answer is for policymakers to strengthen the institutions that monitor educational performance. Better school inspectors and measures that identify which schools are improving academic outcomes would be a boon in any case. Developing countries are estimated to spend 2% of GDP a year on education that has no discernible effect on whether pupils are actually learning.
The bigger point is that private education offers too many potential benefits to poor countries for it not to be encouraged. Chains bring in money, from both parents and foreign investors, which is likely to be better spent than aid and government cash. In 2014 less than 70% of education aid actually reached recipient countries (much of it was spent on scholarships in donor countries). A 2009 study in Tanzania found that about 37% of government grants intended for education were lost.
Private education also promises innovation. Scripted lessons may be somewhat robotic, but in countries like Kenya and Uganda teachers need to be nudged to stop talking, ask pupils questions and check that the class understands what is going on. The evidence is not conclusive but Bridge’s own analysis suggests that it improves pupils’ results.
Bridge to somewhere
All the while it pays to remember the alternative. Private-school chains are not perfect, but their rivals are usually worse. Of the 337m primary-school-age children who look likely to fall short of basic international standards, three-quarters are in school. Most of them are in public schools. Not to try something different would be shameful.

No comments:

Post a Comment