We often think kids shouldn't earn money. We even have laws that restrict and prevent their ability to work in the US. I want to jump right into how I see Steemit's model can improve our education system by financially incentivizing children to learn and grow.
Kids love games. They love earning points, getting high scores, and sharing this stuff with friends. Things like PokemonGo are this generation's baseball. When you see kids who have never left the couch for years all of a sudden run around town like madmen trying to catch virtual objects for virtual points, you know that there is something bigger to this equation.
Is it just the game? The captivating experience of tapping your screen at air? Or is there something greater at play? What if at the end of a week of playing PokemonGo, the kids had enough money to buy a little something off Amazon? Do you think that they would be less enthused about the game or more enthused?
What if instead of a game, kids actually got paid from the Steem block chain for successfully learning things? This can't possible work...right?
A teacher makes a post with their assignment. The students must upvote the post for attendance purposes. In the comments they would submit their work. If their work passes, the teacher upvotes their comment. Other kids may upvote their comments as well.
Now, of course this wouldn't work on Steemit, because everyone could see each other's work, and cheating would be the name of the game. However, we could build another platform that runs on the Steem block chain that reveals comments after the teacher's 12 hour payout from the students' attendance votes.
Additionally, students could submit their own individual assignments as regular posts. If other teachers and students like their work, they will get upvotes that way as well. The same holds true for the teachers. If other teachers and students are inspired by their work, they too will be encouraged with upvotes.
These educators will be providing their services impartially to any child who wants it anywhere in the world. Parents would even be incentivized to upvote good teachers, in order to encourage their activity, while increasing their ability to push more money to their students. In the long run, the best educators rise to the top, while students are encouraged to work hard so they can earn some more real world "points".
Collaboration between peers is immensely beneficial to learning. If you haven't seen this talk yet, check Sugata Mitra's TED Talk:
What if we created a more student driven model, that was less top-down, with the teacher the only one calling the shots. Perhaps students could upvote subjects that they would like to explore. Perhaps students could actually curate who teaches them by downvoting counter-productive teachers. This has potential for severe abuse, but maybe there could be impartial Recursive Delegated Voting, where impartial users could ensure the students aren't abusing this ability.
I can imagine a sea of potential teachers, ones with great reputations and lots of Steem power, who would encourage and support children from all over the world to learn. They will engage and financially incentivize the kids to maximize their potential, while guiding them towards their real passions in life.
We often forget, but there are many kids in this world that would give much of what they own for a good education. How about we flip the script and pay them to learn instead.
