Can Students Have Too Much Tech? 198
theodp writes: In a NY Times Op Ed, developmental psychologist Susan Pinker goes against the conventional White House wisdom about the importance of Internet connectivity for schoolchildren and instead argues that students can have too much tech. "More technology in the classroom has long been a policy-making panacea," Pinker writes. "But mounting evidence shows that showering students, especially those from struggling families, with networked devices will not shrink the class divide in education. If anything, it will widen it." Tech can help the progress of children, Pinker acknowledges, but proper use is the rub. As a cautionary tale, Pinker cites a study by Duke economists that tracked the academic progress of nearly one million disadvantaged middle-school students against the dates they were given networked computers. The news was not good. "Students who gain access to a home computer between the 5th and 8th grades tend to witness a persistent decline in reading and math scores," the economists wrote, adding that license to surf the Internet was also linked to lower grades in younger children.
This is not new. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This is not new. (Score:5, Interesting)
Except for very bright students, Then it is discovered that the teachers and dumbed down education hinders students more.
If you are on either side of the bell curve you need special education. Low IQ need more hand holding, High IQ need the teachers to get the hell out of the way.
Re: (Score:2)
You don't need special anything. You can make more progress with special considerations, and this is true of every student, everywhere on the bell curve. It's just that the differences are more dramatic for the anomalies.
Re:This is not new. (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA is conflating very different issues:
1. "Tech in the classroom" is NOT the same thing as "teaching tech". Just dumping a bunch of laptops and iPads into a classroom accomplishes nothing. But that doesn't mean we shouldn't teach programming to kids. They are completely different issues.
2. "The digital divide" is NOT a problem. It is a symptom. The problem is dumb/poor kids doing poorly. The fact that other kids are doing well is a good thing, not a bad thing. We should focus on ALL kids doing better, not closing the gap by pulling the smart kids down.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Plus it would help with the so called lack of females in programming if we introduce them to it at a younger age right?
Re:This is not new. (Score:5, Interesting)
The kids who are interested will already know more than an intro class can teach them. It's the same as thinking of giving an course on how to win at FPS games - those who are interested already know how, and for the rest it's just a waste of time.
I tried to get my two daughters interested in programming, and now I'm happy they didn't bite. Competition is going up, salaries and benefits are going down, and the "up or out" attitude would leave them with no job when they hit 40.
Better that they learn to use computers just as a tool, to write, to do spreadsheets, and to play games and surf the web. Programming is fast becoming a dead-end job, same as web design already is.
Re: (Score:2)
I dont think programing will be dead anytime soon, theres still a steep bar of entry if you are going to be good. graphic design and web design is dead because the market is saturated.
Re: (Score:2)
Christ, a one-semester programming course is not a commitment to a particular career. No more than it is for chemistry, physics, or biology. Everyone should have an idea of the basic building blocks of the world around them; cargo cultists are not what we need.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The kids who are interested will already know more than an intro class can teach them. It's the same as thinking of giving an course on how to win at FPS games - those who are interested already know how, and for the rest it's just a waste of time.
You could use that argument for all of the subject matter in school.
We could do most children a lot better by removing one study hall and replacing it with a how to handle money class.
But I suppose that would be like teaching them a trade, in an"Academics are superior" chauvinistic world
Re: (Score:3)
Better that they learn to use computers just as a tool, to write, to do spreadsheets, and to play games and surf the web.
I never wanted to be (and am certainly not now) a programmer, but getting my feet wet allowed me to write scripts that made my work so much faster over the years, whether it was VBA macros for researching patents or *nix shell scripts for assisting in running molecular dynamics simulations.
Even if they never have to deal with spreadsheets, they will be dealing with the web every day, and knowing a tiny bit of HTML can make that a lot nicer. Even if you are just posting an ad in Craigslist (or a comment on S
Re: (Score:2)
Hint: you took those courses in university. Grades 5-8 (the students in the study) don't have the same educational needs.
Also, the "how the technology around us works and why things function the way they do" argument is SO totally bogus. Do we teach everyone the inner workings of how a car or a tv or a radio or a washing machine or a camera or a microwave or an oven or an air conditioner or a fridge works? Nope. There's no point. 99% of them will never use that knowledge. When it's broke, they either get
Re: (Score:2)
Home Ec is probably the one anomalous course at school. It's goal is not academic, it's practical.
Home Ec is to teach people how to run a household - how to cook a basic meal at home, how to do basic house repairs, how to maintain a budget, taxes, debt, how to do laundry, ironing etc. etc. etc.
It's a course on how to live in society. Instead of teaching coding, I'd say home ec should tech the basics of computer use (including how to use basic office applica
Re: (Score:2)
Learning basic programming to kids seems like a good way to get them interested in it.
Some basic scripting, learning what if, while and loops are?
Seems very worthwhile.
Trying to teach advanced "flavor of the year" seems lika a wazte until at the very least high school though.
You can count on any specific knowledge about a programming language to be next to irrelevant in about five years.
But the basics?
They are pretty much universal.
Also, learning kids a bit about html, link structures and so on?
Also a good
Re:This is not new. (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Programming is becoming the new mathematics. Increasingly, scientific models are in computer programs rather than mathematical equations. Even the ones that are in mathematical equations, solving them is less practical than modeling those questions themselves in computer programs.
Numerical calculus (Score:2)
scientific models are in computer programs rather than mathematical equations
"Scientific computer models" ARE mathematical equations. The physics model in a FPS, the scientific one that simulates air pressure in climate models, or shoots a space probe through a gap in Saturn's rings, they are all using Newton's equations to model the behaviour of an object.
There are generally two types of equations used to build scientific models, whether it be on paper or silicon. The ones that bend to calculus are said to have an "analytical solution" and can be solved with pen and paper, but t
Re: (Score:2)
"Scientific computer models" ARE mathematical equations.
Yes, but to solve them it is more fruitful to learn programming rather than "mathematics" as is likely to be taught in schools. Which is what I was saying.
E.g. Olympic archery events can be analyzed by mathematics - one can say each shot IS a mathematical equation. But one practices archery rather than learn mathematics to do well in such events. Their being mathematical equations is a useless but interesting trivia.
Re: (Score:2)
"Scientific computer models" ARE mathematical equations.
Yes, but to solve them it is more fruitful to learn programming rather than "mathematics" as is likely to be taught in schools. Which is what I was saying.
Way back in secondary school, whne I really sucked in math. Part of it was the teacher was the most uninspiring and boring person ever to teach, and I was just having trouble grasping. Which was weird, because most every other subject, I was way ahead of my classmates.
Then my electronics teacher had us learn how to use slide rules. It was as if a switch was thrown. Here on that hunk of plastic were numbers that connected the dots, that gave a fine mechanical representation of math in so many forms
My al
Re: (Score:2)
Tactile learning helps, I try whenever i get stuck - http://homeworktips.about.com/... [about.com]
Re: (Score:2)
No I'm not saying that at all. What gives you the impression?
We should NOT be teaching programming in school, (Score:2)
We should NOT be teaching programming in school
Agreed. They should just accelerate the basic math, science and English courses already. There is no reason calculus can't be taught by grade 9, for example. It's been done. Kids can easily learn all the algebra and geometry by 8th grade (really 6th grade) in the right environment. Teaching styles are so outdated. highschool in a well desired world would all be advanced science courses and real world models such as accounting and statistics and maker-fair style building projects.
Re: (Score:2)
We should NOT be teaching programming in school, any more than we teach antenna design, television show production, lens grinding, or other trades. Especially when those who are interested are already learning it on their own.
Why not? The trades versus academic distinction is a morally bankkrupt system. I've seen way too many adults who never figured out what they really want to do in life.
In an age where they have "career days for elementary students that just have talking people saying "yeah, this is great", a little hands on experience might be a better way.
The American diminishment of "trades" is a real hot button topic with me, as I took a trade plus academic schedule, and saw just how much discrimination is held by th
Re: (Score:2)
TFA is conflating very different issues: 1. "Tech in the classroom" is NOT the same thing as "teaching tech". Just dumping a bunch of laptops and iPads into a classroom accomplishes nothing.
Problem is, too many students and teachers think Facebook is a course, and a technology.
Re: (Score:2)
Except for very bright students, Then it is discovered that the teachers and dumbed down education hinders students more.
If you are on either side of the bell curve you need special education. Low IQ need more hand holding, High IQ need the teachers to get the hell out of the way.
THIS! I was bored out of my skull during High school, and for some weird reason, it was never "caught", or else just nothing was done about it. I'd read the class material as soon as I got it, knew it, and the rest of the school year was torture by boredom.
My failing was that being a teenager, I hadn't developed the drive quite yet. If the system didn't think I was woth a shit, well who was I to argue. Girls, games, and goofin' were the result. I was the perfect candidate for independent studies, and
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
You can read a Superman comic or a physics book. You can watch the A-Team or the Science Guy. You can play Call of Duty or write a recursive descent parser. Technology isn't the problem, but it's also not the great equalizer. It's what you do with it that advances you or holds you back. Technology is an accelerator, an amplifier, in every direction.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. A better question might be "Is it a Tool or a Toy"? For most people, tech is only a toy. For those that use it as a tool... they can take off like a rocket.
Books (Score:2)
You can read a Superman comic or a physics book. You can watch the A-Team or the Science Guy. You can play Call of Duty or write a recursive descent parser. Technology isn't the problem, but it's also not the great equalizer. It's what you do with it that advances you or holds you back. Technology is an accelerator, an amplifier, in every direction.
But suppose you don't have the technology, no computer or television or console gaming, and all you have are books. You will almost certainly learn to read well, and that will put you ahead of a LOT of people today. The best thing you can do for your kids is take their summers and make sure that for large portions of them they don't have access to media other than books.
Re: (Score:2)
The best thing you can do for your kids is take their summers and make sure that for large portions of them they don't have access to media other than books.
That's just silly, I agree reading is a good habit to get your kids into but you don't broaden a child's education by restricting stimulation to your preferred mode of communication. If you want to "unplug your kids" take them camping, out of radio range on an unpowered site, and yeah, take some books for bedtime. I assure you they will gain more from the camping experience than the joy of curling up with a good book.
Re: (Score:2)
The best thing you can you are do for your kids is take their summers and make sure that for large portions of them they don't have access to media other than books.
Aside from a timeless Summer, there is also the every-day time. You're not going to achieve the proper effect unless, during the evening time when they are supposed to be doing homework, you are nearby and are also reading a book.
Abridged history of the Great Distraction.
1. parents reading or knitting, kids have nothing but homework in front of them (until it is done)
2. family gathers around the radio, kids manage to multitask just enough to complete homework
3. early television, all watch a favorite TV sho
The trouble lies in communicating (Score:2)
You are right, in many circles this is well known. The trouble is that it is often not communicated to the decision makers.
I teach at a disadvantaged middle school and I see this on a constant basis. To make it worse, I teach computer applications and business. I see the students off task and falling behind even with active monitoring. Yes, it is the students that need the most help in advancing themselves that are the first to go off task.
Some of the off task behavior is that the devices have already becom
Why Educational Technology Has Failed Schools (Score:2)
"Stay on task" like a workhouse or factory? Whose task? To what end?
The new (yet old) paradigm is learner-directed education. A healthy kid's own natural curiosity and desire to succeed then helps him or he power through challenges (if it has not been wiped out before then through boredom/confusion or rewards/punishments). However, most software and even internet content is not that educational and so is a rough fit. We need more good stuff, especially FOSS educational simulations. If kids are not choosing
Re: (Score:2)
Helping raise kids well is what parents, relatives, friends, neighbors, village, tribe, churches of the better sorts, and extended community are for... We got along fine without compulsory schools up until the last 150 years or so...
So kids don't have to go it alone -- except, perhaps, that other forces in our society have greatly damaged parenting, family life, community and village life, and so on, making it harder for them to help kids grow well.
Just one example related to the problems cause by two-incom
Re: (Score:2)
Every serious (read "non-vendor-sponsored") study for the last 20 years has shown that computers in school hinder education.
Except that this one doesn't, smarty-pants. The author of the fucking article herself says as much:
We don’t know why this is, but we can speculate.
And then she goes on for the rest of the fucking article making stupid assumptions about the influence of technology on students, before admitting that the only factor that really matters is good teachers.
Which we have also known for ages, but choose to ignore because having good teachers means paying taxes.
Re: (Score:3)
Having bad teachers means paying taxes.
What WAS your point with that?
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the whole article is a clusterf*ck. The study cited has nothing to do about computers in schools, but rather the negative impact on grades of introducing computers in the home. The rest of the article is just speculation (Yes, I downloaded the study in pdf format)..
Look at the last half of the article:
Technology does have a role in education. But as Randy Yerrick, a professor of education at the University at Buffalo, told me, it is worth the investment only when it’s perfectly suited to the task, in science simulations, for example, or to teach students with learning disabilities.
And, of course, technology can work only when it is deployed as a tool by a terrific, highly trained teacher. As extensive research shows, just one year with a gifted teacher in middle school makes it far less likely that a student will get pregnant in high school, and much more likely that she will go to college, earn a decent salary, live in a good neighborhood and save for retirement. To the extent that such a teacher can benefit from classroom technology, he or she should get it. But only when such teachers are effectively trained to apply a specific application to teaching a particular topic to a particular set of students — only then does classroom technology really work.
Even then, we still have no proof that the newly acquired, tech-centric skills that students learn in the classroom transfer to novel problems that they need to solve in other areas. While we’re waiting to find out, the public money spent on wiring up classrooms should be matched by training and mentorship programs for teachers, so that a free and open Internet, reached through constantly evolving, beautifully packaged and compelling electronic tools, helps — not hampers — the progress of children who need help the most.
None of these statements about computers in schools is supported by a study that looked uniquely at the impact of introducing a computer in the home. It's just speculation because it looks like th
Re: (Score:2)
I wrote : " Every serious (read "non-vendor-sponsored") study for the last 20 years has shown that computers in school hinder education."
You replied "Except that this one doesn't, smarty-pants. The author of the fucking article herself says as much:
And then she goes on to say that computers in the home interfere with grades. How is that inconsistent with what I wrote?
Also, if you really want to call me a smarty-pants, chew on this: this study has nothing to do with computers in schools. If you down
Re: (Score:2)
Every serious (read "non-vendor-sponsored") study for the last 20 years has shown that computers in school hinder education.
Actually not entirely true.
My ex has a masters in special education and researched some studies.
With a properly trained teacher and a strong curriculum it can enhance certain subjects and bring interests. If you go to a bunch of disadvantaged children who have no interest in learning and just want to chat with their friends and listen to music and give them a computer. Yes it will harm learning.
Wired magazine had an article about a Mexican middle school math teacher. He realized letting his kids research on
Re: (Score:2)
Yup. The computers are not the free variable. The competence of the teacher is.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Every serious (read "non-vendor-sponsored") study for the last 20 years has shown that computers in school hinder education.
The problem is with the software, not the hardware. Good software will keep offering problems that are challenging but not impossible for an individual student. Bad software will offer the same problems to every student, without consideration for how they have performed so far. Horrendous software would give the kids browsers, so they can just spend their time surfing the web (or trying to find ways to surf the web) instead of actually researching the stated topic. That's the case where kids with compute
Tools make it easier to accomplish tasks. (Score:2, Insightful)
A general purpose computer is a powerful tool for many tasks. However like all tools some personal discovery and possibly training to aid that discovery are required to make the best use of the tool.
Just throwing money, or tools of any kind, at a given problem isn't going to inherently address the problem. Tools need actual critical thinking and artistry of use taught to be effective.
Re:Tools make it easier to accomplish tasks. (Score:4, Insightful)
I don' think that general-purpose computers should be used in schools without software to limit the use of the computers. That can be for a duration, like during class time or during the school day, or it can be full-time, so that a computer is still limited to its intended function in its entirety, but leaving computers open to do anything just means that much more opportunity to not do work.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think this is related to the difference between special purpose use, or general purpose use. I think the problem is like anything else in education - parental involvement will increase children's learning. If the parent works with them to learn how to use the device, I'd bet their scores would go up, similar to a parent who reads to their child or helps them with math homework.
If the parent says "I don't have to teach them anything, the school gave them a computer for that", or "I can't teach them
Re: (Score:2)
"I don' think that general-purpose computers should be used in schools without software to limit the use of the computers."
Absolutely. When possible, children (and most adults) will avail themselves of youtube, twitter, facebook and other nonsense. This brainrot actively interferes with any tendency to learn anything. We once thought that television would be a great educational tool--well, what happened there?
The problem is not the technology or the media; it is the eye candy that competes with the presenta
Re: (Score:2)
I take it you have never heard of proper secured accounts, reasonably obscure passwords, and well managed file system rights.
People who think the command-line shell is somehow a magical escape from all limitations are a blight.
Re:Tools make it easier to accomplish tasks. (Score:5, Insightful)
Just throwing money, or tools of any kind, at a given problem isn't going to inherently address the problem.
Throwing money at a problem generally leads to a well-funded problem, not a solution.
Babysitter? (Score:3)
Are they measuring adult/supervisory interaction in these studies? Technology can't be a baby sitter for children/students. "What's this website 'Imgur'?"
Who did they compare against? (Score:2, Insightful)
Who were these "one million disadvantaged middle-school students" compared to in order to determine that there was a "persistent decline in reading and math scores"?
Were they compared against their own scores from earlier testing?
What's to say that the decline wouldn't have happened anyway over the same time period, even if they hadn't been exposed to computers and the Internet?
Ages 11 to 15 are when many "disadvantaged" (that is, black) youth start to get involved with gangs, drugs, violence, and not going
Re: (Score:2)
You want a control group? With sociological studies you're lucky they actually measured real people and not proxies... control groups are asking for way too much.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Are the factoring in that most inner city schools learning and getting good grades is considered... "acting white" and looked down upon?
I suggest identifying the smart kids and removing them from the caustic peer environment that is designed to keep them down.
Re: (Score:2)
What's to say that the decline wouldn't have happened anyway over the same time period, even if they hadn't been exposed to computers and the Internet?
Indeed, the very first thing that jumped out at me is: how did they correlate their findings? Did they compare the correlation between computers and schools with the funding abyss into which most poor schools have fallen into over the last two decades? Did they compare the correlation between the arrival of computers and the start of No Child Left Behind, and its disastrous effect on education outcomes?
Prima facie, attempting to isolate the effect of technology from other recently introduced policies and p
This pays credence to my rant about tech (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, I have never liked tech in class. Never!
"Students who gain access to a home computer between the 5th and 8th grades tend to witness a persistent decline in reading and math scores," the economists wrote, adding that license to surf the Internet was also linked to lower grades in younger children.
About me: I am a former full-time teacher:
Now my $0.02.
That's why kids from the so called "third world," that come here consistently beat our own kids in all subjects that really matter. Why? Their brains were conditioned to think. They only used PCs if they had any, at home. And only when homework was complete. Homework done the "old fashined" way.
Look folks, there's so much distraction in class that kids can't really learn. It's hard for such young minds to focus. The trouble is that our learned colleagues submit studies that are clearly biased, and what can you say? The contract to supply the latest gadget is inked! It's a sad state of affairs now. The so called "third world kids" when here, quickly catch up with tech and do even better. Is anyone listening?
Re:This pays credence to my rant about tech (Score:5, Informative)
At the college level though I see a different kind of problem. Many of the people from 3rd world countries I have encountered do VERY well at rote memorization tasks and can often solve engineering problems that are almost exactly what they have done before but when you step outside of that they quickly run into problems. I find that american and canadian engineers are more likely to rely on a computer to solve the hard math part but they are much better at figuring out how to define the problem and what should be done to solve it.
I am not sure why but most european countries still seem to do rote memorization for many disciplines and base all grades on a single 2 hour exam. It is all pretty silly. Maybe some day education won't be confused with memorization.
Re: (Score:2)
In Sweden, we have consistently been going less and less memorization and this has led to lower and lower results on international tests like PISA.
Much of the discussion is why we perform lower, and it's almost never even suggested that the tests are poor indicators for actually being successful in a chosen field.
It's almost always seen as a failure of the school system.
I'm not so sure.
The biggest advantage of rote memorization early on is that you learn to accumulate minute details quickly, this really hel
Re: (Score:2)
I nave not seen any kind of standardized test so far that I thought was a remotely accurate prediction of skill.
Overall humanity has a huge problem with education at this point. We have done the research and we know that memorization does not work for actual learning. However, no amount of research seems to turn into actual changes.
At this point I think we are going to have to just destroy the entire education system from grade school through grad school. They won't change and they live in their own world d
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
This is a very shortsighted way to look at the situation. There are a number of problems with it.
It doesn't take into account that the third world students you talk about aren't the average students in their home nation. They're typically the children of the local elite, and enrolled in private schools. But the American students they're compared against are usually average stude
Re: (Score:2)
In one sense, I totally get the traditional "learn to think for yourselves" approach to education.
In another, I have seen "Smartboards" used very effectively by several teachers in different situations.
Elementary kids "signing in" to class on the smartboard - not exactly deep thinking, but a basic life skill of making your presence known at a place you are required to be - reducing workload on the teacher for attendance taking and reporting, and getting the kids at least minimally engaged before morning ann
Re: (Score:2)
The basic problem is districts ship technology but not applications and basic training, nor investment in adapting their syllabus's to match and take advantage of their new capabilities (I would guess because that makes it go from "a lot but reasonable to" to "no upper bound because you need to plan to have developers on full time").
Re: This pays credence to my rant about tech (Score:2)
You're exactly right. My dad made his teaching career by bringing computers to schools in the 1980s and 90s. What I remember him spending most time on was evaluating software and preparing lesson plans (often for other teachers to use). There was a multimedia CD with a trip to Scotland, it had river geography etc, and probably made for a much more useful geography lesson than "type your homework into the computer". Unfortunately, once IT in schools became more official the was no choice but to teach Word.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, what do you expect me to do? Use chalk to theoretically discuss my Physics experiments on a slate?
Granted, I am doing that from time to time but I'm also a bit annoyed when my pupils still have to use pencil and paper to write down the data from experiments they're doing. That may be worthwhile the first two or three times to show them the ropes, but after that it gets old fast.
Or take chemistry classes - so, first the pupils have to draw the molecular structures on their paper and then draw it again
Its not that there's too much tech... (Score:4, Interesting)
Its what tech, and how the tech is used. Both in the Apple and Microsoft Camp, our schools have been and are being fleeced for billions possibly Trillions to buy grade school and high school kids toys, from MacBooks, to iPads, to Surface Tablets. Linux and Android technologies that could be used to teach effective use of problem solving in Math, science, Literacy, and assistive technologies for the Disabled are being shut out to prop up wholesale robbery of the tax payer to buy media consumption platforms to create an addict user base that is helpless without effective tools.
Re:Its not that there's too much tech... (Score:4, Informative)
Buying stuff is easy.
Teaching is hard.
The web can be a great tool... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'd argue the rise of the tablet is also a problem here though: computing of 20 years ago meant you weren't too many steps away from seeing how the system runs, how it operates, how you can create new programs on it. This isn't even possible on Apple-branded tablet products, and trends too "way too complex" on Android systems (although things like AIDE do mean you can theoretically develop new apps - but I doubt I'd have gotten anywhere with Java and all the boilerplate compared to a command line terminal w
Re: (Score:2)
I'd sortof maybe agree. I started out with a time shared BASIC terminal equipped with the finest punch tape reader available in 1972. Hooked up to a mainframe. The ONLY thing we could access was BASIC. So it wasn't a general purpose computer in the sense that we couldn't browse porn, news or even anyone's grades. All we could do is learn how to program. So, the half dozen of us who played with the machine (instead of going to pep rallies) learned something.
We were 1) antisocial and 2) more or less int
I really think it depends (Score:2)
In grade school I can't think of many good uses of constant tech but there should be times specifically for it to learn.
At the college level it depends on the type of courses. I find that a laptop helps a lot in my engineering classes at bother the undergraduate and now at the masters level.
Especially at the masters level it is easy to look up subjects you need to read more on as the professor mentions then so you can read the articles later. After some classes I will have 20 tabs queued up to read.
Some of
Re: (Score:2)
I did a Masters Thesis in 1990, just before the Internet became "a thing." My access to research materials was dismal. I was driving to various libraries and finding different stuff at each one, none had anything approaching a complete picture of the subject (basically, any subject specific enough to do a Masters Thesis on). My access to communicate with colleagues in the field was equally dismal. I'd spend hours on microfiche, in a library I had to drive to and pay to park at, to find the name of an in
Re: (Score:2)
I can't even imagine dong that for my subject. It is impressive that you managed to do it and I am thankful I don't have to go down that path.
My Master's thesis will be on chromatography simulations at industrial concentrations with industrial bio-molecules.
Overall I think that computers have helped a lot if used wisely and have enabled entirely new areas of research that are saving hundreds of thousands of lives every year.
They can also definitely be abused but that is a reason to learn how to integrate th
Re: (Score:2)
As we always said, a week in the lab could save an hour in the library....
Not that I would wish the current funding situation on anyone, but the tools available to grad students and other grunts, compared with the 1980s, are just astounding. Of course, I'm sure they said the same between the 1950s and 1980s - that's progress. But it could take weeks to get an article - even if you knew of it. Graphing huge datasets with a little Texas Instruments calculator that had a little slice of magnetic tape for me
Lame Lame Lame! (Score:2)
Certain kinds of calculators have been banned from test taking for a long time. If the tech supplants mental requirements: its not allowed.
School is for teaching brains not for checking circuits designed by someone else.
Ask something less obvious next time!
Re: (Score:2)
Not using tech also limits the problems you can solve and the kinds of approaches you can take.
During an exam there is just no way to solve coupled ODEs or god forbid PDEs but there are a few calculators that can solve those kinds of problems now. This means you can give more realistic equations and get more realistic answers instead of dumbing problems down to the point where a human can do them.
At this point there is no real need to solve an integral, a differential, ODE, PDE, coupled system etc by hand T
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not sure I entirely agree, but I do agree that explaining "why" in decent terms has always been my biggest problem with understanding mathematics. I can just about get through calculus if I rote-memorize for long enough to start seeing the pattern, but the entire process utterly failed me when it came to complex analysis (5 textbooks and one failed semester later and I'd say I'm still at zero - the only subject where after a few hours I could still have absolutely gotten nowhere).
Re: (Score:2)
The way we teach calculus is based off of rote memorization. You need all the rules to solve the integrals. However, functional analysis is an almost entirely different kind of skill. Functional analysis is based on the theory that underlies calculus but that is usually skipped in order to just teach straight problem solving.
I see skills like functional analysis as more important since you learn what to expect from functions and why. The exact answer a computer can give you but a better understanding of fun
Re: (Score:2)
You of course realize that what you are doing is quite a ways from the universe discussed in TFA. You've already made it to the point where technology is a tool for you. You're on the right side of the bell curve.
What TFA is talking about is tech in the public school system as a vehicle, for 'mass improvement' - dragging the whole curve upward. I don't think anyone argues that SOME people figure out how to use tech to better themselves. Where it sits for the hoi polloi is the question.
too much tech,... (Score:2)
unless the kids get 'borg-yfied' the problem isn't the amount of tech it's how it is introduced and utilized
if you allow them to use facebook, whatsapp, twitter and who knows what all the time sure learning isn't that attractive unless it's done the right way, by teachers who know what they are doing,...
The tests are the problem. (Score:4, Insightful)
Students can be motivated in other ways than by tests and grades. Using tests and grades really teaches kids that they should dislike school.
Alfie Kohn makes The Case Against Grades [alfiekohn.org].
A favorite passage:
Re: (Score:2)
Thus, students can be invited to participate in that process either as a negotiation
Wow, can you possibly think of a worse idea? The teacher isn't a democratic leader, he's a person who literally knows better than the students (at least, that's why the teacher was selected). I can tell you when I've been in classes where I had to grade myself, I always gave myself top marks. There is no reason to do otherwise.
If you don't like grades, here's a better solution: make the classes pass/fail. If the student learns the subject well enough to move on, then they pass. If they don't learn it well
Betteridge's law of headlines says... (Score:2)
Can Students Have Too Much Tech?
Betteridge's law of headlines [wikipedia.org] says the answer is... wait a minute. TFA says the answer is "yes"?!?
Does this researcher know she has disproved one of the most oft-cited Slashdot axioms?
Could YOU have too much tech? (Score:2)
If anyone was to ask "Could I have too much tech?" I would laugh in their face.
Businesses do not go around asking, you know, perhaps the smartphone, laptop, and desktop I gave to my employees is too much. The idea is just plain ridiculous.
The real question is "Could the tech we are giving to students suck balls so bad that it is worthless?"
Because I have seen businesses give out crappy tech and I a
Re: (Score:2)
just one question: could you survive without it? If not, there is something wrong with you.
As a math/science guy... (Score:2)
Math (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
On one hand, they are partially correct. Every PC, tablet, phone etc. has a damn calculator these days. Hell, anything that can query google can work as a calculator. At a certain point we are better spent learning why and how to use the math rather than forcing to learn time and again how to perform the calculations by hand.
On the other hand, multiplication is at such a low level, any person who can't do rudimentary multiplication in their head probably shouldn't be passed to the next grade much less gradu
Order of magnitude vs. precise (Score:3)
IMHO, an important skill is order-of-magnitude calculations. If you subtract US$79.99 from your bank balance in a checking account, you should realize something is wrong if your balance drops by $1000 instead of near to $100. Same for political-type calculations relating to roughly how many people are in a country and how much some policy might cost if it costs $X per person and so on (by rounding, to get a ballpark figure). Without that basic skill, people are completely at the mercy of the machines or the
If you can't add without a calculator... (Score:2)
If you can't add without a calculator 33 and 84 in your head and get an answer instantly, then you are fucked up.
If you have to think about it at all, then your education has been wrong.
There is value to pages and pages of addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division work. And in not being able to access a calculator to do it.
Re: (Score:2)
I've failed interviewees who couldn't perform simple addition in their heads.
The fuck am I supposed to do with them when the power goes out and I've got a shop full of paying customers??
Re: (Score:2)
Battery powered calculators? Slide rules? Backup generator? Cell phone apps? Calling a back office who has a calculator?
But see also my other comment on order of magnitude stuff, especially to quickly double-check the answer from a machine. It is probably more important that someone notice that a $99.99 dress and $48.33 pair of pants should not add up to $1048.32 (high by x10) or $58.32 (low by x3) from adding or missing a nine somewhere than that they can do an exact calculation in their head.
Although, if
Re: (Score:2)
I've failed interviewees who couldn't perform simple addition in their heads.The fuck am I supposed to do with them when the power goes out and I've got a shop full of paying customers??
It's funny that you won't hire entry level employees to man your front shop that can't do math in the head, when your much higher paid accountants would never ever do math in their head, and are repeatedly taught never to do that, as it is a bad habit. That is how drawers come out short.
Besides, if the power goes out, your customers are leaving without buyng anything anyways.
If the computer crashes, you are going to want solar calculators in your crash kits anyways as the line is going to being go
Re: (Score:2)
and why not? I have been my entire working life and have never been out by so much as a penny.
Anecdote, completely non-scientific (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Keep kids from computers as long as possible (Score:2)
Kids need so much -- nature; human interactions; emotion coaching; music; manipulating blocks, sand, and water; physical exercise; and so on. Computers (or other screens) crowd that all out so quickly as a "supernormal stimuli". Sure kids can learn computers young, but the human mind is adapted to grow a certain way within a natural environment and an extended family/tribe. Best to avoid computers/screens as long as possible IMHO, as it will happen soon enough anyway. We did not let our kid have much screen
tempting the flameboys (Score:2)
It is my very humble opinion that constant access to tech kills the ability to think, and encourages laziness in critical analysis (often completely annihilating it as people go for that panacea for factual argument, Wikipedia, in attempts to "prove" their arguments, ironically often proving them wrong but like some sort of broken thing they insist that the bloody peer reviewed encyclopedia is wrong!). Back when I was at school, we found out the speed of sound through experiments. Wikipedia wasn't even a pi
no kidding (Score:3)
Using tech is not the same thing as understanding tech. People have been making this mistake since PC's went mainstream.
A PC using kid in 1980 was likely a smart geeky kid. A "tech" using kid in 2015? Not so much. Sure, a few of them ... just like it was a few kids back then.
If it is distracting... yes. (Score:2)
the tech should facilitate. if it is not doing that then get rid of it.
Can Students Have Too Much Tech? yes (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tech to read textbooks is great for engineering texts!
With an ebook you can SEARCH. Trying to find out where a table of values I need to pipe roughness or viscosity relationships vs temperature for a certain chemical is so much easier to do with searching. Most engineering books seem to have about a hundred pages or so of just tables, graphs etc at the end.
Re: (Score:2)
And yet, look at you. Thirty years later, the day before Superbowl, you are frittering away the time, hanging out with the low life pond scum at Slashdot.
Were it for your teachers to lock that closet. Think of the possibilities.