Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Stats Education United Kingdom

UK Computing Teachers Concerned That Pupils Know More Than Them 388

mikejuk (1801200) writes A survey of UK schools carried out by Microsoft and Computing at School reveals some worrying statistics that are probably more widely applicable. The survey revealed that (68%) of primary and secondary teachers are concerned that their pupils have a better understanding of computing than they do. Moreover, the pupils reinforced this finding with 47% claiming that their teachers need more training. Again to push the point home, 41% of pupils admitted to regularly helping their teachers with technology. This isn't all due to the teachers being new at the task — 76% had taught computing before the new curriculum was introduced. It seems that switching from an approach that emphasised computer literacy to one that actually wants students to do more difficult things is the reason for the problem.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

UK Computing Teachers Concerned That Pupils Know More Than Them

Comments Filter:
  • by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:13PM (#48804009)

    I'm pretty sure I knew math, science and sometimes English better than my teachers through high school. Experienced teachers know how to deal with students like us - how would this be any different?

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:23PM (#48804101)

      I'm pretty sure I knew math, science and sometimes English better than my teachers through high school. Experienced teachers know how to deal with students like us - how would this be any different?

      The real difference is you thought you knew math, science and sometimes English, but when it really came down to it, masters-level mathematics could be whipped out to gently remind you, or perhaps break down some English sentence structure to show your actual understanding vs. what you think you know.

      Experienced teachers know the difference between knowledge and wisdom. The difference today is you don't have students going home spending another 4 - 6 hours every day tinkering with math or English like you might with computing.

      • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:37PM (#48804271)

        Quite to the contrary. Our teaching schools in the US are the degree mills for the B school dropouts. Simply put, those who can do math realize that teaching is a bad financial career choice. However, this is tolerated by the parents who think that schools are free babysitting and don't value education. There are many great teachers, but few of them can defeat years of shitty parenting on a large scale. Therefore, it really doesn't matter that the plurality of teachers are marginally competent, both in their fields of study and as educators. We set low, low standards as a society, and our teachers meet them. And, we shouldn't blame them; we hire the boards that tolerate it.

        • by kilfarsnar ( 561956 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @01:34PM (#48804843)

          Quite to the contrary. Our teaching schools in the US are the degree mills for the B school dropouts. Simply put, those who can do math realize that teaching is a bad financial career choice.

          This is another indication of how far out of whack our priorities are as a country. You make money based on how much money you make for someone else, or how hard your position is to fill. But we won't spend money just because something is important; like teachers or quality infrastructure or mitigating climate change or whatever.

          The linked article talks about how hard it is to get good teachers for computing because anyone who's any good at it can make a lot more money elsewhere. Is anyone proposing paying a computing teacher $90,000 a year, or whatever is competitive, to compensate for that? Everyone seems to want to pay teachers less because they get summers off. Nobody wants to pay them more because for the vital function they serve in our society. Like I said, priorities out of whack.

          • Everyone seems to want to pay teachers less because they get summers off.

            Something of a tangent, but I support year-round schools.

          • Summers off is a myth. Teachers are in classroom prep and training all through June and July. They might squeeze in the normal two weeks of vacation that other Americans will scatter throughout the year, if they're lucky.
            • My best teacher, also now my friend loves his summers off.

              He is experienced, knows his stuff and basically recycles the same content/lesson plans each year and only updates to improve on what did/didn't work so well, changes in curriculum and administration (as well as to relieve boredom).

              On our last conversation, there is a high chance that my son will be in his class this year and from what I have spoken with my teacher friend about - I should recognise a fair bit of the work he has to complete.

              • You raise an important difference between computing teachers and other school teachers. Your friend can legitimately teach the same course every year, because the (say) mathematics syllabus only marginally changes from year to year. A computer teacher teaching the same course for 10 years would be teaching far out-of-date software, languages etc.
          • by digsbo ( 1292334 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @03:25PM (#48805867)
            Teachers are preventing us from paying computer science teachers competitively, because the union insists in collective bargaining. Sorry, a fifth grade teacher should not get paid as much as a high school CS teacher. Nor do we have to offer them as much pay - there are too many elementary ed graduates for the number of available positions.
          • This is another indication of how far out of whack our priorities are as a country. You make money based on how much money you make for someone else, or how hard your position is to fill. But we won't spend money just because something is important; like teachers or quality infrastructure or mitigating climate change or whatever.

            The linked article talks about how hard it is to get good teachers for computing because anyone who's any good at it can make a lot more money elsewhere. Is anyone proposing paying a computing teacher $90,000 a year, or whatever is competitive, to compensate for that?

            I had an excellent electronics teacher in HS who mentioned once that he took a 50% paycut when he switched from industry to teaching so I agree
            with you completely but what system would you propose? Should we rank occupations and pay them what we value them? This might be possible
            in a controlled economy but I'm not sure how you would do it in a free market. Do people who are more skilled at that occupation get paid more?
            Even unions have a hard time with this, do you pay based on skill level or senority or

      • by jd142 ( 129673 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:39PM (#48804301) Homepage
        *THIS* The other thing I wondered about is the different expectations. If your instructor still thinks myspace is where the cool kids hangout, does that mean the instructor knows less? From a student's point of view, yeah, it does, because the instructor doesn't know what the students think is important. Which is where to get the good porn on tumblr (or whatever the kids use these days). And the instructors might even feel the same way. The good teachers who know there stuff and care about the kids may undervalue their abilities because they don't think they can reach the kids on their level because the teacher is still on facebook and the kids are on to the latest. Why, those teachers may still think email is relevant. To a 15 year old, email might as well be the telegraph.
        • by fahrbot-bot ( 874524 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:59PM (#48804493)

          In related news... Kids often know how to use something, but not how those things actually work. The two are not the same thing, even though they may think it is. TFS doesn't make a clear distinction as to which kind of literacy is at issue.

          Why, those teachers may still think email is relevant. To a 15 year old, email might as well be the telegraph.

          I doubt a 15 year old knows how either of those actually work, in addition to being clueless about whatever cool new thing they're using. The Curiosity Foo seems weak in this current generation.

          • Kids often know how to use something, but not how those things actually work.

            In these days of "teach to the test", seems that too many schools don't care about the "how", so don't bother teaching it.

            I was a very curious kid. So was my daughter. And so are my young nieces and nephews. Curiosity isn't dead, but does seem to be highly discouraged.

        • Why, those teachers may still think email is relevant. To a 15 year old, email might as well be the telegraph

          The teacher would be right in that case, and the student will be in for a rude awakening when they enter the work force in any sort of knowledge worker role. In business, email is still the medium of choice for written communication. And that's not likely to change in the near future.

      • I suspect that it's worse than that: Unless the UK has miraculously sprouted an ample supply of people both skilled in computing concepts and willing to put up with schoolchildren for relatively little money, I can't escape the sinking feeling that this situation involves a bunch of "Pressing Buttons in MS Office!" courses, whose teachers feel intimidated because kids these days can fingerpaint on their iDevices.

        It would be nice if it were better than that, and it actually involved reasonably skilled tea
        • Until very recently computer education in the UK was heavilly focussed on "ICT" which to a large extent ammounted to "pushing buttons in MS office". There was an attidude that permated the computing world (both inside and outside schools) that "you don't need to understand how it works" or "it's too complex for you to understand". Microcomputers that started up at a basic prompt where replaced with PCs were the ability to program was hidden if it was there at all. Systems that curious kids could fiddle with were replaced by systems locked down by network admins.

          The result of this attidude persisting for a long time (a couple of decades afaict) was a decline in the number and skill of people applying to university for computing related programs. This decline got the attention of people in high places and there is currently a push to move away from "ICT" to a computing syllabus that actually includes programming and learning about the fundamentals of computers.

          https://www.gov.uk/government/... [www.gov.uk]

          Hence teachers pushed into teaching an area in which they have little knowlege and confidence. Combine that with the availability of material on the internet and through various other outside-school sources and it's not going to be difficult for the top pupils to legitimately overtake the teachers and the mediocre pupils to give the impression that they know more than the teacher.

      • I'm pretty sure I knew math, science and sometimes English better than my teachers through high school. Experienced teachers know how to deal with students like us - how would this be any different?

        The real difference is you thought you knew math, science and sometimes English, but when it really came down to it, masters-level mathematics could be whipped out to gently remind you, or perhaps break down some English sentence structure to show your actual understanding vs. what you think you know.

        Experienced teachers know the difference between knowledge and wisdom. The difference today is you don't have students going home spending another 4 - 6 hours every day tinkering with math or English like you might with computing.

        Math and Science yes; but English? If you're Elementary and Middle School English teachers did their job right, then most students should have a very firm grasp of the English language grammatically by about 8th or 9th grade, and could easily surpass their teachers in about the same time frame where English classes should be less about grammar and more about comprehension of literary works.

        The sad truth is that due to the experiments with learning since the 1970's there are many English teachers (at all

        • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

          by tepples ( 727027 )

          in about the same time frame where English classes should be less about grammar and more about comprehension of literary works

          Why should English classes be more about works of fiction and theatre by dead white European males and less about communicating your own ideas to other people?

          • in about the same time frame where English classes should be less about grammar and more about comprehension of literary works

            Why should English classes be more about works of fiction and theatre by dead white European males and less about communicating your own ideas to other people?

            Who said what materials? Does it really matter whether it is a translation of Homer's Ilyiad, Shakespear, or Godfrey Mutiso Gorry? The point is that you're looking at larger works to understand how language works in bigger and bigger pieces instead of small, isolated samples so you can learn about the bigger picture of writing instead of remaining in an isolated box.

            And often covering such materials will lead to improvements in your own writing. That's not to say that writing would not be included, just

            • Who said what materials?

              Whoever set the curriculum while I was growing up said what materials. Plays by William Shakespeare, specifically the tragedies, were overemphasized in every year of high school except the junior year, which was devoted to American literature. And do English teachers leave out nonfiction because they delegate it to science and history teachers?

        • by tepples ( 727027 ) <.tepples. .at. .gmail.com.> on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @01:57PM (#48805091) Homepage Journal

          there are many English teachers (at all levels, even collegiate) that cannot do even basic sentence diagraming, or know that "he or she" is not grammatically correct when trying to be "gender neutral" which should use the neutral gender (it for singular or they for plural).

          "He or she" is animate gender; "it" is inanimate gender.

          • by steelfood ( 895457 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @06:09PM (#48807225)

            Historically, "he" is the gender-neutral pronoun. Gender itself comes from Latin, and in all romance languages, the masculine is used for gender-neutral or gender-ambigious contexts. It was a hard and fast rule in English until some idiots decided it wasn't PC enough and started railing on people who follow it, but at the same time provide no suitable alternative.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        I'm pretty sure I knew math, science and sometimes English better than my teachers through high school. Experienced teachers know how to deal with students like us - how would this be any different?

        The real difference is you thought you knew math, science and sometimes English, but when it really came down to it, masters-level mathematics could be whipped out to gently remind you, or perhaps break down some English sentence structure to show your actual understanding vs. what you think you know.

        Experienced teachers know the difference between knowledge and wisdom. The difference today is you don't have students going home spending another 4 - 6 hours every day tinkering with math or English like you might with computing.

        Um, don't know about you but I quite well did know math and science far better than many of my teachers. I don't think you know the difference between knowledge and wisdom, either.

        I first pointed out an error in a text book in 3rd grade and explained it to my teacher who was quite impressed (yes, I was correct and the book wasn't). I wasn't wiser than her by a long shot. But I was a little smarter in one area.

        My 6th grade math and science teacher hated me because I had to point out the errors that she ma

      • It's hilarious the parent comment got at least two upvotes. Say what you will about geek arrogance, but insecurity at others being smarter than them is a lot more common on Slashdot than its opposite. Or maybe they just prefer to hide in silence and let the mod points do the talking.

      • Sadly, graduate level math classes are not necessarily a requirement to teach HS math.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by plover ( 150551 )

      This is no different. Back in the 1970s, our high school physics teacher had the computer terminal in his area, and so he taught the computer class. He wouldn't allow me to take it because, as he said, "you already know more than I do about this."

      The important thing is it wasn't an admission of failure on his part. He knew the class was beneath me, and simply didn't want me to waste my time.

      • For me, it happened in 1968. I had just started a 3 year curriculum for computers. Started out with FORTRAN 44 on a teletype connected to an IBM 360. Within a month all of us (students) had outpaced the teacher's knowledge. From there it was a matter of reading the manuals we could get our hands on and as much lab time as we could fit in.

    • I knew Programming better then some of the Computer Science Professors.
      Teaching isn't always about passing knowledge. It is about developing skills. So if you get a kid who knows more about computers then you do that is fine and good. That means you should start teaching skills. Such as using the computer to solve problems, or have them research better methods, give them problems that will make them think. Have them improve their form...

      I am not a teacher I work in industry. However I do mentor new emplo

  • by Doug Otto ( 2821601 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:13PM (#48804011)
    Even back in the 80s, I had a teacher fail me on a programming assignment because I was using things she hadn't taught yet. This isn't a 'new' problem. It's difficult for teachers to stay on top of the required curriculum and still have time to be continually training.
    • by Opportunist ( 166417 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:25PM (#48804127)

      Been there. Only I had been lucky enough that my dad can be quite belligerent when it comes to my education. I butted head with my math teacher, mostly because I came up with a faster, easier and as it turned out better way to solve something. My dad (who is a very nice man, also for offering me the chance for a good education that his dad refused him) only asked if I'm dead sure and then we took the fight. It was a victory eventually, but what was way more important was what I learned:

      1) Just because someone claims he is an expert in something doesn't mean he is. Question his results and ask for proof. A degree means jack, a title even less. If I don't know, teach me so I can learn. Explain to understand, do not expect me to believe. This is science. Not religion.

      2) Never dismiss a solution as false based on its source. Question its merit based on itself, not on its messenger.

      3) When you're certain to be right, escalate past the person who keeps insisting you are not. Maybe there's a different agenda he is pushing aside of what's right or wrong. Quite likely, he is.

      • by SQLGuru ( 980662 )

        I was the kid that would do extraneous proofs in Geometry just so I could use those theorems later on in the test.

      • by Imagix ( 695350 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:47PM (#48804369)
        I'd agree with all of them, with the additional caveat of: dispute with respect. I've disputed many papers and exams during my education. But the discussion was always civil. "I think you've marked this answer incorrectly. Could you tell me where and how I went wrong?" and not "You thug! How dare you challenge my obvious superiority!".
        • Sorry. You're right, today that needs to be said.

          • by Matheus ( 586080 )

            Honestly (that skill needs to be taught. While reading the novel of a post above where grade by grade counts of incorrect test questions were enumerated. Mention was made about "My 6th grade math and science teacher hated me because I had to point out the errors that she made on her exams." (there were others but that's the best quotable). Response: Well, duh! No one likes to be told they're wrong, especially teachers. I can read someone describing that they gently or respectfully pursued such action bu

      • I had a similar disagreement with a math teacher who's answer was... Yes I know it's faster and easier to understand that way but I'm teaching you how it will appear in papers that are currently being published, show me you understand it as it's being taught anything else is extra credit.

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:26PM (#48804139)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jason777 ( 557591 )
      Ya, me too. I had an assignment where I used arrays in solving the problem. I guess the class didnt cover arrays yet, and so I failed the assignment. The teacher has one solution that she was expecting to see, and when it wasnt that, I failed. So, I was somehow supposed to guess what they wanted to see for a solution in that class based on what was taught to that point. Granted, I wasnt really following the "lectures" at all. I'm pretty sure the teacher was basically 1 week ahead of the students, lear
      • So, I was somehow supposed to guess what they wanted to see for a solution in that class based on what was taught to that point. Granted, I wasnt really following the "lectures" at all.

        Then the problem wasn't the teacher - it was you. You weren't "somehow supposed to guess", were "supposed to know based on the materiel presented to date".

    • I had a teacher fail me on a programming assignment because I was using things she hadn't taught yet.

      Depending on what you mean that isn't necessarily a bad thing in a programming course. If the purpose of an assignment is to learn about data structures by recreating them and you back everything with std:vector, you aren't really completing the assignment even if all the functionality is there. Of course, it's also entirely possible that the teacher just didn't know what they were doing or, more concernedly, simply on a power trip; so no judgement, just pointing out a possible counter argument.

    • That's a cop out and a shitty teacher -- unable to respect their student(s). The whole point of a teacher is to inspire their students to learn -- NOT to demotivate them! "Success" is the student knowing more then the teacher. That's how Scientists work!

      In grade 10 (or 11) I had a physics teacher bust my balls one time because I was using the cosine law [mathsisfun.com] even though it wouldn't be taught until the next grade.

      I asked him "Why am I being penalized for understanding Math??"

      He relented and said I could keep usi

    • by TemporalBeing ( 803363 ) <bm_witness AT yahoo DOT com> on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @01:02PM (#48804517) Homepage Journal

      Even back in the 80s, I had a teacher fail me on a programming assignment because I was using things she hadn't taught yet. This isn't a 'new' problem. It's difficult for teachers to stay on top of the required curriculum and still have time to be continually training.

      That will often be the case because they want to ensure you understand what they are teaching.

      For instance, in my networking class I already had a full C/C++ network library that I personally wrote for Linux/POSIX using a similar interface design as the Windows WinSock2 API. However the professor said I could use it only after we had covered the lower level functionality in order to ensure I knew what I was doing, which I did; so my library got used for the second 2/3rds of the class instead of all of it. A little annoying, but sometimes you just have to get over it and deal with it.

      I also had a TA that took points off because I used "while(True) {...}" instead of "for (;;;) {}" for an infinite loop. The professor gave me back the points because it was not part of the assignment to do an infinite loop in that manner.

      That said, a good teacher will know when to learn from the student and how to allow the students to go beyond what they are teaching.

    • by GNious ( 953874 )

      I've "lost" my programming teacher during a verbal exam, and she gave me a lower grade on a written assignment since I came to a different (but valid!) solution than she did (there wasn't specified what type of solution was needed, only the problem), but where it got really bad, was when the following semester she presented stuff right out of my team's project-paper from the previous semester ... without even acknowledging it being an almost-direct rip-off.
      Took it to the principal/head of the school, who wo

  • by garcia ( 6573 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:18PM (#48804057)

    Technology funding in school districts (in my area these are tax levies) is already insanely high; mostly because we're pushing for tablet devices in schools driven, behind the scenes, by extremely lucrative vendor deals.

    Without adequate training, the related curricula are severely limited and thus the added benefits when compared to related cost are low, if at all positive.

    Now, this research, as well as the districts, are rightly saying the teachers need more training in order to leverage the technology effectively; however, what really needs to be understood is just how much training is really necessary and whether the tech gap between teachers and their students can really be mitigated.

    It is my unfounded opinion that it will never be mitigated enough as teachers are not usually well enough equipped at their own subject matter, let alone keeping up with the taxing knowledge demands of technology.

    What we need to do is take a step back and ensure that these additional tax investments in technology are actually doing anything to further student development and because they aren't, think about what we can do to actually concentrate on doing that instead of buying the new and shiny and letting it, effectively, collect dust in the corner while levy after levy is passed to support it.

    • I'm preaching to the 4-digit choir here, I know. Let me issue the disclaimer that I am not a teacher but a bunch of my friends are, and my job does depend on staying up to date.

      You're right, the gap cannot be mitigated. It's how kids' lives and brains work. We were the same way at one point, too. You'll never have as much time to learn new stuff, nor the same neuroplasticity, as you did when you were a bored junior high schooler with all those summers and weekends and snow days and such. It was nice to be s

      • Staying ahead of the kinds means understanding the fundamentals and teaching them that - the kids may know Ruby or Scala or whatever the current fad is, but if they don't understand when to use an array or a list we'll continue to get shockingly crap programming from them.

    • by Above ( 100351 )
      It's an easy problem to solve, not that we will. High school level teachers should get one year of paid training every 5-8 years. That is, perhaps teach for 5 years, then attend a full years worth of classes at a university in their field, then go back to teaching. Paid, at their regular salary. That's how you get teachers who are current, interested, and properly trained. Will most of the country go for it? No. Cries of paid vacation, and do it on your own time. Then they will complain teachers are
  • To be fair... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by digsbo ( 1292334 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:19PM (#48804063)
    It's one thing for a teacher, like my computer science teacher in high school, to be expected to understand computer SCIENCE. It's another to expect them to know a bunch of software packages. That's one of the big problems with computer education in schools; the idiots putting together the curriculum don't understand the difference between conceptual learning and facility with using systems.
    • Re:To be fair... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by jandrese ( 485 ) <kensama@vt.edu> on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:24PM (#48804107) Homepage Journal
      This is really the key. You don't have to know the ins and outs of snapchat to teach Big O notation or data structures. That said, most primary and secondary CS teachers are way behind the times on lots of technology, and can often teach material that is no longer relevant. If they start talking about optimizing compute cycles (a topic that often comes up after Big O notation), then they're almost certainly going to be wrong now. CPU performance is dominated by cache misses, and organizing your data accesses can be far more important than reducing the total number of operations taken.
      • That said, most primary and secondary CS teachers are way behind the times on lots of technology, and can often teach material that is no longer relevant.

        One of my college computer science professors told our class something that stuck with me ever since. He said that what he was teaching us would be obsolete by the time we graduated, but the concepts behind it would endure. Sure enough, I don't use a line of specific code that he taught me - or even the language that we learned at the time - but knowing

    • by xaxa ( 988988 )

      It's one thing for a teacher, like my computer science teacher in high school, to be expected to understand computer SCIENCE. It's another to expect them to know a bunch of software packages. That's one of the big problems with computer education in schools; the idiots putting together the curriculum don't understand the difference between conceptual learning and facility with using systems.

      That is the issue here: it used to be knowing about software packages, the "idots" have changed it (see here [slashdot.org] and here [slashdot.org], among others) to include some programming. FTA "It seems that switching from an approach that emphasised computer literacy to one that actually wants students to do more difficult things is the reason for the problem."

      • by digsbo ( 1292334 )

        Right, agreed. So, once upon a time we had typing classes. Would you then expect the typing teacher to take on teaching shop and engineering courses that were about how to build a typewriter? No.

        I'm critical of teachers for a lot of things, but not knowing how to teach Towers of Hanoi isn't one of them. Demanding that someone who knows how to teach Towers of Hanoi get paid the same as the social studies or health teacher IS one of them.

    • by pjt33 ( 739471 )

      There's another fairly major point: although the title of this /. thread talks about "computing teachers", the summary talks about "primary and secondary teachers", and the original press release [msdn.com] talks about "teachers responsible for teaching computing". Primary school teachers, who were already expected to know everything about everything, are now (PDF warning) expected to teach programming, debugging, networking, etc. [computingatschool.org.uk] There's no particular reason why people who signed up to teach 5 to 7 year-olds ten year

  • Drop the classes (Score:5, Insightful)

    by itzly ( 3699663 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:20PM (#48804073)

    If the kids already know enough of the subject matter, that's a good indication that the class can be dropped, and replaced with something that they don't know much about.

    • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:28PM (#48804155)

      This. I work for a university, and official policy is that you can test out of any course, for any major, if you can prove that you already know the contents of the course ( though tests, and meeting with a group of professors who simply ask about some concepts and ask you to explain them). Saved me from having to repeat about one years worth of classes, and freed me to be able to learn things that actually were useful as opposed to being bored repeating things. High school should have the same concept. Kids aren't stupid and lowering the bar to make sure everyone feels "smart" is doing a disservice to most of the kids in class.

      • by tepples ( 727027 )

        I work for a university, and official policy is that you can test out of any course, for any major, if you can prove that you already know the contents of the course

        Accredited, or the kind we used to see advertised in e-mails with a "U`N`I`V`E`R`5`I`T`Y D,I,P,I_,O,M,A,S" heading?

  • by Karmashock ( 2415832 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:26PM (#48804137)

    Is that standard knowing what the mouse buttons do? Because I wouldn't call that literacy. That is about as much literacy as knowing what vowels are is english literacy.

    Raise the bar.

  • by goodmanj ( 234846 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:30PM (#48804187)

    Everyone talks about how today's young people are computer geniuses, but I'm a college physics professor, and I can tell you that kids coming up from high school are as clueless about tech as their grandparents. They just know how to Twitter and Instagram, but they have no idea how computers or the Internet work.

    This isn't new, of course, nobody understands the technology their world is based on. My father and grandfather lived in an era where most people knew how a car worked and how to fix it, but in my generation that's a mystery. I understand how computers work and how to fix them, but the next generation treats them as black boxes. And so on.

    • by __aaclcg7560 ( 824291 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:36PM (#48804253)
      While working at the help desk call center at Google in 2008, I had to walk software engineers through the process of turning on their PC by pressing the power button. Unlike college computer labs, no one was going to turn the PC on inside their cubicle for them. They're getting paid big bucks to do something at Google. Learning how to turn on a PC was a good start.
    • Complexity (Score:5, Insightful)

      by sjbe ( 173966 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:46PM (#48804363)

      My father and grandfather lived in an era where most people knew how a car worked and how to fix it, but in my generation that's a mystery.

      I assure you that at no time in history did "most people" know how cars worked or how to fix them. Perhaps a higher percentage of the population than now but it never was "most". Not ever.

      Most people have always been clueless to varying degrees about many technologies they depend on. Furthermore, while the basic principles of how cars work hasn't really changed much, there is a LOT more technology involved these days so there is much more to learn. I have owned cars where you could almost literally stand in the engine compartment with the engine still in the vehicle. You could do that because they were very simple compared to today's vehicles. Now you have to deal with a myriad of sensors, ECUs, emissions control equipment, electronics and other stuff that simply didn't even exist 40+ years ago. An engine compartment is packed very tightly now and there is a lot more to know about.

      I understand how computers work and how to fix them, but the next generation treats them as black boxes.

      No more than they ever did. However the same thing applies. When I was younger it was actually possible to have a fairly complete understanding of how the 8088 computer on your desk worked. The technology now is quite a bit more complex "under the hood" (so to speak) and it's a lot harder to understand more than basic principles. It can still be done but there is more to learn than there once was.

      • I have owned cars where you could almost literally stand in the engine compartment with the engine still in the vehicle. You could do that because they were very simple compared to today's vehicles.

        You could do that because they were wasting a lot of space in the name of aesthetics, and because they wanted to give you access to work on stuff while leaving the vehicle intact. Today, major repairs are meant to be done with the engine and probably transmission removed from the vehicle entirely; although many dealers have come up with tricks that permit them to skip the engine removal step, they'll still charge you for pulling it as they'll bill you at a flat rate which is based on the estimated time to c

    • I understand how computers work and how to fix them, but the next generation treats them as black boxes.

      Reading this... I can't help but fall out of my chair laughing.

      Knowing how a CPU works is pretty much useless for fixing computers - because you don't fix them at that level. You fix them at the "black box" level - you don't solder in a new NAND gate, you swap out the graphics card. The same goes for working on cars in your father and grandfather's day... Very few of them knew more than the bare basi

  • Meh... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by __aaclcg7560 ( 824291 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:31PM (#48804195)
    I was misdiagnosed as a mentally retarded in the first grade due to an undiagnosed hearing problem in one ear. My teachers were routinely surprised when I blew out the annual evaluation exam on the genius side, calling it a stastical fluke. Nothing was more prized in the special ed classes than a well-behaved idiot who brings in 3X funding.
  • Big deal (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Sarten-X ( 1102295 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:31PM (#48804207) Homepage

    Last time I was in school, I had a better grasp of "modern technology" than most of my professors. This was in a computer science program. It's not a problem, because my CS professors didn't need to teach me how to use Facebook or make a slideshow shiny enough to woo investors. They still understood algorithms better than I did, and that was the knowledge they were passing on.

    In today's shocking news story, we find that older people are familiar with an older generation of tools. For most "primary and secondary teachers", their job is to teach the basic skills and concepts that are elemental for the more advanced intellectual tasks encountered in a professional career. Sure, technology can assist in that endeavor, but it's not the whole solution. Teachers only need enough technology knowledge to use the technology needed for their classes. Anything more is gratuitous.

  • Wow (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sootman ( 158191 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @12:49PM (#48804385) Homepage Journal

    68% of primary and secondary teachers are concerned that their pupils have a better understanding of computing than they do. Moreover, the pupils reinforced this finding with 47% claiming that their teachers need more training...

    Polls are great, but just imagine what it would be like if we lived in a world where there was actually a way to measure who knows what...

  • I can foresee some classes in Pascal, Fortran, Cobol, or even a newer yet obscure language like Erlang. This way the teachers will feel that they are superior to the students. I program C++ every day, yet some whiz could probably write small amounts of template code that I simply could not parse in my head. But good luck finding an under 20 whiz in Powerbuilder.

    The other thing I foresee are a whole lot of frustrated kids who write far better code than was asked for yet will be told that their code is "wrong" because it doesn't match what was expected. For instance a "while" loop being insisted on with a "for" loop being rejected. Especially if it is newer C++ for loop that can iterate through something like a vector.

    Then just to piss everyone off I can foresee many teachers being grammar nazis. So if(x==2) would lose you marks because it wasn't if( x==2 ) which would be considered better by that teacher than if( x == 2) but still not as good as if ( x == 2 ). But the same student might as well quit the course if they thought that using the magic number 2 instead of a const or a #define was actually a problem. I suspect that following strict formatting guidelines for some teachers will be more important than having the code even compile.
  • Teaching (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ledow ( 319597 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @01:12PM (#48804625) Homepage

    Then stop teaching.

    Seriously, I work in schools - I'm an IT Manager for independent (private) schools. The good teachers are the ones that have knowledge to impart to the kids, the other type generally do not know anything until they have to teach it and then they learn it badly and, thus, teach it badly. Can you imagine being a science or maths teacher and never having done "chemical reactions" or "simultaneous equations"? Sure, there's always an answer that even the teacher won't know but it shouldn't be something so far out of your reach that you can't a) take an educated guess on the spot and b) come back the next day with the properly researched answer.

    With the best IT teachers, I can discuss electronics, computer science and mathematics at a level where neither of us need explain ourselves. They've probably done my job in the past, for the most part, too. And, very deliberately, they will refer to themselves as IT teachers or CS teachers and not ICT teacher (which involves using a computer to do word processing, not anything the kids couldn't pick up on their own in ten minutes).

    The last lot of students that went through the school I'm at were building drones running on Raspberry Pi's and .NET Gadgeteer, they were cobbling together Z80 and 6502 circuits in their lunch break, and they were programming in C#, C and assembler. Some of it wasn't stuff we'd done before, but we managed to teach them new stuff all the way through, based on extensive knowledge of the subject and actually SITTING AND LEARNING the stuff they wanted to learn in advance so they could be taught effectively. And, there, it's really more of a "I've never done C# but it's a programming language that I just need to learn the quirks and syntax of and all my old knowledge then comes back into play".

    If you can't do this, as an IT teacher, then you probably should go back to school yourself. This is no more insulting than suggesting that a French teacher know French, or a Maths teacher know Maths.

    If you're not the one teaching, why bother to have you there?

    • by voss ( 52565 )

      "which involves using a computer to do word processing, not anything the kids couldn't pick up on their own in ten minutes..."

      Because elementary school kids can pickup word processing on their own in 10 minutes? Really??? Tell me about it...

  • by istartedi ( 132515 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @02:13PM (#48805251) Journal

    The best teachers aren't afraid of students who know something they don't. Teaching teachers all the knowledge is impossible. Teaching teachers humility is possible, though seldom seen.

  • by DavidHumus ( 725117 ) on Tuesday January 13, 2015 @04:06PM (#48806267)

    ...when (leading-edge) schools were just starting to get computers. I found it to be good motivation that I was at the same level as the teachers. We were all in it together, learning this stuff for the first time.

No spitting on the Bus! Thank you, The Mgt.

Working...