Bitcoin Forum

Across the country parents are asking districts for metrics showing how large investments in tech for education are helping educate. You'd think that the disruptive nature of tech would be able to help kids learn faster. But researchers are showing that's not the case, as researchers from the Rand corp have said this:


Obviously there are certain things that help kids. Such as certain pieces of tech (which are old now, and not what the article is talking about) such as powerpoint, presentations, videos, interactive question answering through something like kahoot, and so on and so forth.

But the 'new tech' for children is removing a pen and paper from the classroom, opting for everything to be digital and showing no real benefit. The only people who are benefiting is the tech sector, who are sponsoring massive amounts of these initiatives and advocating for more and more districts to join in.

I'd (alongside parents of the children in these articles) would rather see a mixed experience. Allowing pen and paper in classes that require it (such as math, science, etc) and a computer where it fits (maybe history, english, etc) But even that is an issue, as I don't think every child learn the same and they should be given the choice in the way that they're going to be learning material.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-a-school-district-where-technology-rules-grades-fall-parents-ask-why-11567523719?mod=hp_lead_pos4

I have read studies relating to child neural development and technology in the past. Apparently children from 0-3 especially, but up to 5 years of age have a much higher level of what is called neuroplasticity. This is basically a phase of human brain development where the basic structures of the neurons are forming and becoming solidified in these states. As a result of this, depending on how the neurons are conditioned, it will result in more permanent lasting effects through the child's lifetime. This is an important fact to know for parents because when you give a child under 5 an electronic device or even sit them in from of a tv/monitor, you are wiring their brains in a way that can cause difficulties for them later.

The simplest example I can give is how media has all these quick cuts and fast moving scenes. Humans have evolved a hardwired response to pull the eye to any fast movement reflexively as a survival mechanism. When humans were not at the top of the food chain, this could be the difference between seeing that tiger hiding in the grass before he attacks or being his dinner. Essentially what is happening is all of these quick cuts are triggering this response in children, signaling to the brain that they are in an environment full of predators. As a result the brain becomes hyper active to compensate for this perceived risk to life, and this is where many attention, behavioral, and hyper activity issues stem from. Then parents often end up drugging their children to cope with this and making it worse. In my opinion, based on the scientific data I have read, no children under 5 should be using any electronic device with a monitor, including televisions.

Well, gonna make money right?  ;D

Unless they are bringing things into school that actually allows the kids to learn "tech", then everything else is snake oil. IMHO all they need is a large projecter and a tablet each student loaded with the lessons. And PC of course if they're going to be taught programming.

I wouldn't mind them spending a bit more for materials if they're teaching robotics. That can get quite expensive. IMHO those two, programming and robotics is the tech that should be taught to kids. But then again that's expecting much, of course those kids have to grow up into consumers rather than producers.  ;)

Oh yeah, this is without a doubt true. Though there are still going to be parents who instead of parenting, are just going to hand their children a device and call it a day -- it's horrible, but you don't need a permit to become a parent.

All of this is done because of massive lobbying by tech companies to get state and local governments to push for more tech in schools with no real signs of any benefit.


Yup. Google classroom right now is free for every school that wants to use it. People are like -- oh google is so great they care about education --> Google doesn't give a shit about education, they care about making a buck and they've suckered every kid into using the google ecosystem. They're all going to be consumers for LIFE.

Kids sit in classrooms for 5 or 6 hours a day. What does this teach them... just the sitting there? It teaches them to be good little office workers for their bosses when they grow up. It is brainwashed into their systems as they are forced to sit in school for hours.

Now that we have recognized the above, we can move on to what the kids are taught or not taught as they sit there.

8)

Well yes, wasn't the whole idea of school to mold people into good factory workers? I think this was the case.

Education hasn't changed in sometime, and it's now changing in a way that isn't working in the least.

Well, true. If kids were taught bartering techniques, the big companies wouldn't have any chance. The country would be full of all kinds of little companies, all dong the same jobs that the big one do today.

Everybody could be an Elon Musk, building rockets in his backyard, or being very boring (pun intended), just like Musk is at times.

8)

many children are helped on their learning by technological innovation. children have their own intelligence. as
Visual, Speech, Audio, natural intelligence etc. what we need to examine is how existing technology can be right on target.

I have recently attended an educational conference and this was cited as well. Some have noted that the input/output stimuli-response mechanisms used in interactive "educational" games, sometimes have disruptive effects on the brain of a child. I forgot the exact study as this is ongoing research. Anecdotally however, I have seen toddlers who grew up with gadgets show behavior that makes them act in a way that is congruent with reality.

It's as if they are expecting immediate gratification simply by pushing a button. If they do not get the desired results, they show symptoms of this impatient behavior through temper tantrums and such.

While, yes, eletronic media can be supplemental and helpful in education, advocating for their active usage in classrooms should be constrained to higher level children who have learned the basics of using pen and paper.

Yes, this is without a doubt an issue. There's a whole generation of parents who have substituted parenting for an ipad or a computer or phone or whatever. This has produced an entire generation that is glued to their phone all the time.

Not something that's good when you're looking at the instant gratification all of these children got -- which leads to the temper tantrums and such. Though, the good thing about kids using tech all the time is that they're familiar with an ever-changing world and they're able to adapt to the tech of the future.

Before it was television and radio that people were hooked on.  I know this isn't as extreme as 24/7 access to a phone or tablet everywhere you go.  I do believe our creativity is being lost, our brains are so stimulated now that we are barely even using our minds anymore.  All I'm saying is that we are all addicted to technology, how many here can actually go a week without any electronic device, internet, or television?

Extreme of either side is bad. Students must have a habit of writing with pen daily. That can be achieved only through the traditional methods. However, animation videos, specially to learn new concepts of science and math, and movies related to history can be more beneficial than just rote-learning from a textbook. Extreme use of tech and full elimination of text books and pen paper can lead to health problems as well. However, as everything evolves, education system should also evolve asap.

Most parents buy gadgets for their kids and expect them to self learn, I think it doesn't end with the gadget, there has to be guidance on areas to surf, things to learn from it, and parents should also teach kids that they shouldn't just rely on being consumers of these gadgets only but also creators.
In this day, the average kid is just contented with using the latest app and not creating the latest app.

This is even more relevant now with the entire scandal about Youtube (run by Google/Alphabet) collecting children's information, for which they were slapped a paltry $170M fine. (Decided to look up the exact amount, obviously no result shows when searching via Chrome). I can only imagine the same thing has happened with Google Classroom.

Oh yeah. Google has now noticed that if they open up some amazing platform like Google Classroom, pay off some teachers/administrators (which they've done) to market google products at their district, they're going to get kids hooked on google from a young age.

But not just google browser. These kids are going to be used to using google drive, google docs, google sheets, gmail, google photos and so on and so forth. These kids are going to only know the apple ecosystem so when they get to the age where they're going to be buying products google is going to have them within their grip.

I hate to say it, but this is a major amazing investment by google to lock people down for a very long period of time. It's an astonishingly smart move by smart people.

I may have an old school mentality on this subject, due to my age.

I think the public education system should teach/familiarize kids with today's technology, but there's no reason EVERY child in the school district should have a laptop provided by the school. The only thing it's doing is costing the taxpayers.

I grew up with chalkboards, overhead projectors, pen and paper, no a/c in the classroom.  We had typing classes on "fancy" typewriters. Computers were introduced later in my education by way of a "computer lab", or one classroom full of desktop computer.  Some new-fangled tech like the Commodore 64.

We all turned out just fine, and probably more level-headed than today's youth.

I graduated High School, chose the military over college, and consider myself above middle class with a 6 figure salary.

I do lack technical expertise, but know how to use computers and programs, and do so when needed.
( but I still cant get the clock on my VCR to stop flashing 12:00) ;)

The world's changed. People have all humanity's knowledge in their pockets.

School has been memorization of facts for a long while. Teaching kids to find and trust credible sources makes sense.

I'm in favor of a federal one to one program that allows each child to have a Internet connected device for continuing education.

Ive always said..... everyone over the age of 12 has the answer to all of the worlds questions in their pockets, by way of the smart phone. And what do they do with it?  Take pictures of their dicks.

I believe that at schools kids must learn to use their head and think about the problem and HOW to solve it. In life there isn't one right answer to your problems, you must choose the best one of the right possibilities.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/bill-gates-and-steve-jobs-raised-their-kids-techfree-and-it-shouldve-been-a-red-flag-a8017136.html

In this article Steve Job's and Bill Gate's kids don't use their phones or electronics.

Technology dulls people.

This is without a doubt right. As we continue to care more and more about tests and quizzes, we put more emphasis on memorization rather then learning. Teachers are now forced to teach for a test, instead of teaching the material itself and ensuring that their students are learning - instead of memorization (which is the lowest form of learning and knowledge)

Anyone can learn to reguritage information on request if they stare at it and practice it for long enough. It's a different story to apply the information learned. That's the true test of learning, and it's something that is never taught in this day and age.

Your joke is too old. The young ones are unfamiliar with the concept of a VCR.

Your school example was nearly exactly like mine, but no projectors, that would be luxury. Like yours, they eventually added an optional computer lab, and you had to pay extra to get in, those were Apple ][e clones. And yes, in my time there was still the typewriting class, i still own a pure mechanical typewriter bought back then so i could practice at home. It never got much use, because i already had an Apple //c computer with printer to do actual school work.

There was no Internet, researching things involved physically going to a (school) library, it was limited, tedious and slow, so slow... In this age its a couple of searches away from your pc. For good or bad, you can get the info, and do your homework. But there is also pre-made homework made by others. i don't even know how education coped with current technology, i don't think it did...

I remember some math teachers allowed calculators and some didn't. A similar discussion was going on back then, as it was the pocket calculator era (previous gen had no such thing).

And what is there to come. Implants?

If you deprive your kid from gadgets, he/she will come in contact with those at school. And yes i'm aware of a trend in America about not letting kids go to school at all and instead have home school, but i'm not sure how that even works (its illegal in my country, as primary education at an approved institution is compulsory).

There is also the things they teach at school and its usefulness later in the real world. There are basic things everyone agrees should learn, but some things might seem obsolete or redundant at best. Letting them explore and choose what they feel best with, seems to be getting complicated too.

What is "too much tech"? Is it focused into learning or not? Chalkboard vs e(ink)board is too much? They can both do the same (and in theory the eboard keeps memory so you could copy things you missed later).

What about surveillance, should they have security cameras everywhere so no bullying goes unpunished?

In my days using computers was considered optional. Today is essential to know basic use to get a job.