Before I entered the teaching profession, I read a lot of vague theories about Google.
The idea that Google would change our way of thinking was very convincing at the time.
However, I have never been in a situation where I had to seriously consider the practical implications of that Google-related theory.
--- p.24

Recent research on artificial intelligence has stimulated research on human intelligence and has also provided a wealth of information.
To build machines that can think, scientists need to understand more deeply how humans actually think.
Herbert Simon, an early pioneer in the field, discovered many new facts about how humans think in the process of trying to build a thinking machine.
Beginning in the 1960s and 1970s, researchers began to agree on a more systematic and comprehensive model of basic cognitive structures.
According to this model, the factual knowledge we store in long-term memory plays a crucial role in cognition.
--- p.44

The public service announcement about innovation, which has been airing on news channels almost every hour for a while, appears to have been produced with the intention of preparing for the Fourth Industrial Revolution, but it begins with a dangerous message that implies the uselessness of knowledge education in schools.
“65% of elementary school students entering school today are from a background that has never existed before.
“You will have a completely new job,” he repeats.
This means that the knowledge you learn in school will be largely useless when you become an adult.
The source of this claim is the 2016 World Economic Forum, which popularized the term "Fourth Industrial Revolution" around the world.
To be more precise, the phrase was quoted by Klaus Schwab in the introduction to the forum material, “The Future of Jobs Report,” as “by one popular estimate.”
The 65 percent statistic cited is not based on academic research, but rather on a YouTube video titled "Did you know?" and is therefore very unsubstantiated.
Is it acceptable for such a dangerous claim, one that could undermine the value of education for students and parents, to be so poorly supported? As a school educator, I am deeply perplexed and disappointed by the media's unverified reproduction of such claims.
It was recently discovered that there were cases in foreign countries where questions were raised about the 65 percent statistic above.
The BBC radio broadcast in the UK tried to find the basis for the 65 percent by tracking down relevant scholars, but was unable to confirm it and concluded that the statistic was baseless (May 28, 2017).
'Have 65% of Future Jobs Not Yet Been Invented?'). The BBC confirmed that the 65 percent statistic was first used by Duke University professor Cathy Davidson in her 2011 book, Now You See It.
And at the same time as the publication of the book, a column in the New York Times (August 7, 2011)
I also confirmed that after being introduced in [Education Needs a Digital-Age Upgrade], it continues to be used in many other books and newspapers.
So the BBC presenter wanted to speak to Professor Davidson himself to find out the basis for the statistics.
However, she responded that she did not study the statistics herself, but rather used statistics from the Australian government's Innovation Council website, which she had re-quoted from futurist Jim Carroll's 2007 book, Ready, Set, Done.
She then contacted Jim Carroll to confirm, but was unsuccessful. The Australian website had also been shut down, making it impossible to verify, and Carroll responded that the 65 percent statistic had been discontinued in 2012. The BBC presenter said she had also checked with the Australian government to see if the website and statistics existed, but was unable to do so.
In conclusion, the 65 percent of statistics cited worldwide are unsubstantiated.
The 65 percent statistic in the World Economic Forum report, which is widely cited in Korea, should also be considered unsubstantiated as it is a requotation from Professor Cathy Davidson's 2011 book.
Scholars interviewed by the BBC presenter expressed concern that frequent claims that schooling is useless based on uncertain statistics, such as the 65 percent case, could have a negative impact on students.
In other words, if students are told that the knowledge and skills they learned in school are completely unrelated to their future careers, they will lose their motivation to learn and become confused about what to study.
Finally, we should also take note of the words of Daisy Christodoulou, the evaluation expert we interviewed.
“If we don’t know the types of jobs our children will have in the future, we can’t predict the types of knowledge and skills they will need to do jobs we don’t know anything about.
Therefore, we should not interfere with the teaching of currently systematized knowledge or facts.
Even though that knowledge may become outdated when they enter the workforce, they still need to learn it now.”
--- pp.226-228

When establishing the 2010 curriculum reform plan, the new government actively referred to the international comparative analysis report “Could do better” by Professor Tim Oates of Cambridge University.
Professor Otz analyzed the true nature of Finnish education, saying that it is dangerous to try to imitate Finland because it is a country with excellent performance worldwide, and that a thorough analysis is necessary.
He said that while it is true that there are no tests or homework in the typical school life in Finland, there is a national exam at age 15 that plays a significant role in deciding on university and vocational paths, and that this has a great effect in making students study hard.
Instead of having a class structure based on ability, a supplementary learning system that thoroughly teaches students what they missed during their absences is used to supplement this, and a culture that emphasizes reading and discussion at home has also been found to be very effective.
In fact, observing Finnish classrooms reveals that, compared to other countries, traditional teacher-led classes are predominant, and there are not many student-centered discussion classes.
It was also analyzed that the fact that, due to the influence of Lutheranism, a certain level of literacy test had to be passed as a condition for legal marriage since 1686 was not well known in other countries.
Nick Gibb, the Undersecretary of State, cited Gabriel Sahlgren, a senior research fellow at the Centre for Policy Studies, a conservative think tank, in his paper, “Real Finnish Lessons: The True Story of an Educational Superpower.”
Citing data from the "Center for Policy Studies" (CPS), he argued that the curriculum should be changed from competency-centered to knowledge-centered to improve academic achievement.
Salgren said that many countries are adopting competency-based education reforms, citing Finland's success as a model, but that Finland's success cannot be explained by recent education reforms.
Furthermore, the analysis that educational success was achieved as a result of revising the curriculum to focus on competency was completely wrong.
He said that the results of the first PISA in 2000 and the 2003 PISA, which led to Finland being recognized as a successful country in education, were due to the traditional teacher-led education that had been implemented before that time, and that this was because competency-centered education reform had been implemented at that time.
And the analysis showed that the fall to 4th place in reading, 13th place in math, and 5th place in science in the 2015 PISA was the result of a change from traditional educational culture such as teacher-led classes to student-led classes.
In Korea, there are many cases where the case of curriculum revisions in the UK and Finland is cited as the basis for the argument that school education should be shifted to a competency-centered system. However, it is believed that more caution is needed with reference to Salgren's analysis.

--- pp.234-235