Publish at October 12 2010 Updated July 01 2026
Education has always been torn between meeting the needs of the individual and those of society and the market. Training good citizens, good warriors, good believers, or good workers sometimes finds common ground with individuals’ aspirations to live happily, freely, or in control of their own destinies—but not always, nor everywhere.
In almost every country, schools have served as the instrument that has brought together members of communities with disparate dialects, customs, and religions into a more homogeneous and politically manageable unit. A society is not eager to lose control of this social glue. Those fortunate enough to live in a democratic state know that this state works, to a certain extent, for the common good. In other contexts, this is not always so obvious, and the population is not necessarily eager to attend institutions controlled or supervised by the state.
However,everywhere, teachers, curriculum, schedules, and school locations are mandated. The message conveyed by the school to its students is almost identical; even when cloaked in the noblest intentions of “educating the individual for their holistic development,” the form and practice of education essentially convey the following message:obey authority. This implies that we are (or would be) ignorant and incapable, and that we must conform. A useful lesson, but for whom? We are a long way from the democratic ideal.
The educational system itself constitutes a message, and the concrete message it has conveyed thus far through its practices—and which it has consistently and structurally demonstrated—is not that of the individual’s development that it has claimed or even desired. Of course, there are a few exceptions—some schools, teachers, or initiatives—but these are always considered either marginal or elitist.
By introducing ICT into education, we are changing educational practices: the teacher becomes a guide, and students are more often able to take the helm of their own learning—controlling their activities and choosing their sources. These new educational practices say,“You can become your own captain.” Students can practice this.
If, in addition, we begin to harness the social and communicative possibilities, the tangible contribution of others to enriching learning becomes a reality. We see that others can help us and that we can help others: “Everyone has value for others, and that value can increase in proportion to their contribution, starting right now.”
A third message from ICT is that it is intellectually beneficial to be able to verify the accuracy and integrity of content. “You don’t have to blindly believe everything you’re told.” Students are no longer dependent on predetermined sources, even if they are authorized by the government. One can find the original proofs and no longer settle for the teacher’s or textbook’s interpretations. Given the choice between a hydraulics professor and Diesel, one would usually prefer Diesel—provided, of course, that it is an original source and not an altered version.
Until now, the government has guided public education (republican, populist, Quranic, communist, etc.) by considering its own needs—deemed superior—and allowing the response to individual needs to fit within its priorities.
We can agree on the need for a common social foundation and for equipping individuals with the basics of reading, writing, and methodology, but as for the rest—in terms of the effectiveness of learning— well-informed individuals are generally best placed to judge what suits them and how to achieve it. Sugatra Mitra has demonstrated this time and again in a wide variety of contexts: all individuals, whether children or adults, learn very well and very effectively on their own, provided the right conditions are in place.
If the government wants to take real responsibility for education, it should question its effectiveness rather than its content: it is absolutely unacceptable that, after 12 years of schooling, we accept rates of functional illiteracy, dropout, and outright failure in the range of 40%.
The intrinsic nature of ICT in education is to connect resources with individuals. Its message is, “You can learn what interests you and what you need; you can help others learn what interests them and what they need.” The government’s message should be, “We will help you achieve this by providing you with access, information, protection, and support.” In this way, it would move closer to a truly democratic education system that fosters capable individuals who are in control of their own destinies.
Inspiration
You might also like:
Geoposition in education: what you need to know
In education, the potential of "positioning" is real, and its possibilities are still being developed. Discover some surprising applications.
How can one have the audacity to present oneself in front of a group to speak? Where can you find the energy and confidence to dare? How to prepare oneself to avoid the blocking of the jaws and the breath? We propose a course where we will meet speakers, but also singers, and which will lead you to make some faces in front of your computer.
Sharing for better preservation: a strategy for learning!
When we share a material good, we divide it, whereas when we share an immaterial good, we multiply it. It is therefore in one's best interest to share one's knowledge and learning in order to multiply it... A pragmatic approach can be to document one's work and then share these documents.
System D, edutainment and Lego
The bricks can be used for a variety of applications and educational content, such as university methodology.
The ingredients for the pleasure of learning together
We always learn alone, but never without others, as Philippe Carré puts it. Meetups create learning situations based on the group, and on the pleasure of learning together, with and through others. Let's discover the ingredients of the pleasure of learning together with a meetup on LegoSeriousPlay ©.
