This project evolved with the purpose of finding solutions to three critical problems inherent in teaching mathematics. Low academic achievement, sinking level of contents and the manner in wich curricula is adapted to the information technologies of math's education.

Until now we can consider Information Technologies introduced in to the educational world as being polarized at two extremes. In one side we can include everything that appears on paper converting it to analogic or digital media: video, CD Roms, DVD, Web pages, pdf and so on. At the other extreme we find opportunities offered by the Internet for teaching in any corner of world using more or less prepared materials with students keeping in touch with tutors by phone, mail, e-mail, chat or video conference. Even though we could include a new intermediate and more contemporary tendency wich mixes both possibilities in the Web format thanks to multimedia and new programming languages dedicated to this end. And above all greater popularity and spread of broad band IP communications.

On the creators side mainly, these are cost intensive in time and knowledge (who need to be skilled in programme design). But above all it requires a substantial and risky financial investment. These are technologies that devalue between 15 and 20% annually due to big changes and unforeseable qualitative leaps. Thus projects can be left seriously compromised during development phase, longevity and above all profitability, making them rapidly obsolete. So that the creation ends up in the hands of big publishing corporations or in very dynamic Freeware software communities, where colaborators give their free-time and knowledge to serve the community with whom they produce, consult and share the resources.

So now, the enormous interconnectivity that Internet allows is a constant motivating force for new projects and solutions. But in education what sometimes happens is that a product is delivered prematurily frequently justified more by cost and creative labour than by its usefullness. However it is uncertain up to what point the teacher can incorporate it into their mathematics curriculum. Ultimately, it is not the multimedia that educates. It is the personal presence of the teacher verbaly communicaing their knowledge. Besides nobody can learn unless previously educated in the habit of acquiring knowledge. Consequently there is naturaly a level of suspicion about the true usefulness of these resources in the daily tasks of the educator.

Justification

Math's education has always been based on the following sequence: theory, practical examples and exercises. So that the analysis of acquired learning has always been measured by setting maths problems that grade to what extent the student understands both theory and problem solving formula. It is not difficult to spot that achievement in the subject is directly related to the quantity of exercises completed by the student. That's to say, if we measure by number of exercises set, then more exercises set means more knowledge. Now evidently this is only productive if the answer to the exercise is correct, and so the teacher, after teaching the theory and exmaples, has to constantly correct exercises. Only by correcting exercises can the teacher progress the knowledge acquired.

Consequently the teacher is the central point of education, delivering the theory, afterwards correcting and marking exercises. But being at the core is also a primary obstacle, being conscious that the exercises have to be corrected, this limits the number of exercises set to the number solutions that the teacher is capable of marking. And for a class of thirty students it is obvious that only a few exercises can be set and marked. The common solution is to set exercises for homework and the teacher or a student corrects it on the blackboard the following day. But that's when the second problem emerges, as not all students complete the homework. So progress in the course content is held back because the success targets in exercises are not acheived. Confronted with these two contradictions, teachers tend to opt for one of two solutions; deliver the theory irrespective of whether its understood or not, or halt the progress until most students understand it, by substituting homework with exercises in the classroom. The former solution excludes most of the students and the latter significantly reduces the amount of theory taught from the sylabus. So much so that year by year one can sense that less and less is being learnt, teaching is more difficult and student's educational achievements worsen in the upper grades.

Education Project

Here is a possbile solution. What would happen if the teacher could mark exercises without continuous pressure of correcting them? And if this could be done immediately after teaching each peice of theory. This may appear completely impossible.

This need not be a fantasy, and this is where IT and the magister21 education project comes in. Let us imagin a class where every student and the teacher has a TC (Thin Client). Inmediatly after explaining the theory with a few examples the students start the exercises. Up to this point, everything is normal, but now intrduce the TC, which gives out one exercises randomly for every student to be solved, of the same type, level and difficulty.

The students solve it in their exercise book and enter only the result in the text input box. The program corrects it and if it is wrong, gives two more chances to solve it, discounting a mark for every mistake. If the student does not solve the problem, the system displays the solution. Meanwhile the teacher's monitor displays the statistics of the whole class and the level of understanding for each individual student. Based on this, the teacher decides repeat the exercise or progress to the next one. And so on throughout the curriculum. Furthermore, the system is accesible via Internet. So that students needing more time can continue solving further problems from home as they did in class. And the teacher can monitor at any place and time the student's progress without any additional effort.

Conclussion

As we can see, the computer does not take over the teachers job at any time. On the contrary it is a tool that depends on him and comes to his help. So that he can continously assess and assist the diversity of the class using the exact information about each student. Those that work more learn more. But those who persistently do few exercises are urged to work harder, because normal class dynamics motivates them to do it.

This system finally produces the desired outcome, progressing flexibly through the contents. Actually every student learns more in less time, due to the thorough praxis analysis and accurate knowledge management.

Marcos Martínez.