Too Many Computers Hurt Learning

An anonymous reader writes "The Christian Science Monitor is running a story on a recent University of Munich study of school children in 31 countries that found a correlation between frequent computer usage and poor academic performance. Having more than one computer in the home was found to be particularly bad news! For those Slashdotters with children, how do you deal with your kids' computer use?"

Comments

Hrmm

[Oculus Habent]

When I was eight, we had three computers... one in the family room, one in my sister's room, and one in my room. Of course, they were an Apple IIe clone, and Apple IIe, and an Apple II+, respectively. My sister was valedictorian. My grades sucked, but that's because I didn't do homework. :)

I don't think that multiple computers in a household are patently bad. I think that poor parental understanding and control of their children's using habits is to blame. The key is not too much computer usage, it's too much computer usage doing the wrong things. Half-Life 2 is not a learning experience. How Stuff Works can be.

Computer use in the school is still a fairly new tool. We aren't adept at producing good on-screen content for learning, yet. We still try to push everyone along at the same pace , where computer-based learning should preferably guarantee that a student meets the class requirements and has an opportunity to extend their knowledge beyond the "lowest common denominator" teachings.

Bottom line, computers are still too new to teachers and too unfamiliar to parents right now. Give it some time.

Re:Hrmm

[Jace of Fuse!]

Bottom line, computers are still too new to teachers and too unfamiliar to parents right now. Give it some time.

Might I also add that we need to discourage children from learning to read and write from the contents of chat rooms.

l337 5p34k c4n 0n1y hur7 gr4d3z.

Re:Hrmm

[Suburbanpride]

I think that poor parental understanding and control of their children's using habits is to blame. How about poor self control? I had to take counter strike of my computer so I get work done, but with two terms papers and to finals this week I have spent a lot more time on my computer looking at /. fark, and on my blog than studying. I think I have typed more in my blog than I have on my term papers, and here I am on slashdot, wasting more time.

Computers are great tools for learning, but they are also great tools for distraction.

Re:Hrmm

[ssimontis]

I use the computer, on average, 2+ every school day, and about 5+ hours whenever its the weekend, summer, a holdiday, or whatever, with few exceptions. My lowest grade is a 94. However, there is one thing that sets me apart from some of the others using computers and getting low grades: I don't slack off on AIM all day. That right there is it. I do use AIM, but not as much as some of the deadbeats at my scool. I use computers as a way of learning. I have already taught myself C++, I'm learning HTML, and many other things. If you use a computer for education more than you use it for entertainment, you might see an increase in grades.

Re:Hrmm

[newrisejohn]

I second this. I have a graduate level research paper due Wednesday morning, and I'm neglecting finishing it in favor of posting to Slashdot. It's not just little kids that get distracted with computers. :)

Re:Hrmm

[Satertek]

Half-Life 2 is not a learning experience?!? But there are physics!

Re:Hrmm

[fakeplasticusername]

I'd like to hear your argument for Half Life 2 not being a learning experience. Not trying to be a prick, just curious

Re:Hrmm

[imsabbel]

haha, if that counts, than falling down the stairs is a learning experience,too. rigid or not-so rigid body motion...

Re:Hrmm

[nomadic]

l337 5p34k c4n 0n1y hur7 gr4d3z.

My idea (and I'm completely serious, I think this would work if it caught on!) is to get people to use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling of anything they type, and then refuse to transmit anything that's incorrect. People will over time develop impeccable linguistic skills!

Then part II: When speech recognition becomes widespread, make the recognition software only recognize clearly enunciated words (and then check them for grammar!).

Think about it. We could have an entire society where everyone speaks perfectly clear, grammatically precise day-to-day English (or whatever language you speak in your country)!

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

As a father of three sons....we have had computers in the house since the eldest was about 5 or 6, starting with an Amiga, and shortly afterwards having a 286 clone as well. Now have a couple of PC's, reasonably well equipped. That oldest son is now 21 and studying for an Electrical Engineering degree, as is son number two, who won the prize for top student at his high school equivalent. Son number three has also just won a prize for physical science. All three are proficient at programming in various languages, some self taught, others from their degree courses. The youngest in particular is quite proficient in OpenGL, entirely self taught. They are also all quite proficient at despatching unwanted aliens or whatever in Halo and the like. Also at hacky sack, although I would like to see them get outside a little more than they do...they are all quite capable of sailing a dinghy though so are not total couch potatoes.

Of course, this is purely one small sample, and obviously of kids from extremely intelligent parents...(bg) But in my opinion, with a bit of supervision and guidance, a computer is a very useful tool for helping kids to learn. On the guidance side, there is deliberately no net nanny or censoring of any sort in place, although the machines are in the dining room where all can see what is going on. Also they know that I am capable of figuring out what is going on, at least to the degree that this is possible. As others have commented, most purpose built educational software is complete and utter crap. We got some fun out of the Lego Mindstorms stuff, although they didn't get as deeply into it as I had hoped.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Read this post as "I don't have any friends to talk to, so I get work done."

Re:Hrmm

[MickLinux]

Today's computer usage is a very passive experience. There was a huge difference between the old command line computers, one at a time, and the multimedia computers.

With the old command line computers, you had to be in control of everything the computer did (games excepted, to a limit; but my statement was even somewhat true for the games of the time).

As a result, computers didn't hurt academic performance all that much. But even for those households with computers, back then, I found that students who had a computer usually did well in math, but lousy in the English/history/languages department.

Our school, Harrisonburg High School, really had the ideal computer situation when we came there: one Apple ][+, with priorities being (1) teacher (2) students programming for teacher/entering grades into the homemade grade program (3) 10 minutes at a time for students doing programming (4) students doing other work (5) games. We had a "warn/ then turn off" policy, as well.

What this did, was make us do our programming on paper, so that we could type during the 10 minutes we had. It made us think.

With this setup, HHS went to take 3rd in the national American Computer Science League contest. Then we got 2 more computers, and though we were invited to the national tournament [we were good], we didn't place. Then we got a room full of computers, and that was the end of that.

So I really do think that the key is "too much computers is a bad thing." Hand in hand with that, if you have too much computers, you will also start doing the wrong thing. Supply does create demand.

So what do we do? Our kids' TV policy and computer policy are the same: ~0 hrs per week, ~1 hr every 3 months, to be more exact.

Re:Hrmm

[fireman sam]

"...use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling..."

And which country's grammar and spelling would be determined the correct one? Take english for example. We have American english, Brittish english, Australian english and slashdot english.

A joke perhaps: And American, English, and Australian connect to a spelling correcting chat room and nothing is said.

Should I have mentioned that it was a lame joke.

Re:Hrmm

[bleckywelcky]

Good point, computers aren't bad, but what you do with them isn't always good. This is why you can have 2 or 3 computers in your house (wife + 2 kids + server) but the key is you don't allow the kids to have any computers in their rooms. The same goes for gaming consoles, TVs, phones, etc. There's an easy check to see if someone has done a poor job of parenting (in 75% of the cases): see if one of their kids has a TV, phone, gaming console, or computer in their own room (extra points if they have more than one). These devices should be out in the open where the parents are mulling about so that their usage can be monitored. Perhaps in a den with the TV or in a side office by the kitchen, etc. And it should stay this way until they are 16 to 18 (depending on how responsible and mature they are) or even later if they're complete hooligans and still living at home. Sure, they can still use the public computer in the den, they just don't get the _privelege_ of a private computer. As well, I believe the first time you should have a TV in your own room is after you move out of your parent's house. (And no, I don't live in my parent's basement, heh).

Now, having said that, I did have a computer and phone in my room before I turned 18. However, the phone was there because I helped with the family business on a daily basis (I made personal calls maybe once a month off of it). And, I was into computers before I was 10 ... messing with our old Ataris and Apples (although I did play games quite often ... wasting valuable time ... but I graduated high school in the top 10 out of a graduating class of over 350).

In the end, all kids need is good parenting; not regulation by the government, not censorship by special interest groups, just good parenting.

Re:Hrmm

[ob0101011101]

But language is in a constant state of flux. Many words exist this year that were neither spoken nor heard last year.

Variations in language are a hallmark of a rich culture. Your method of grammar policing would lead to a monochromatic society with no linguistc colour.

(Hmmm... note the EN_AU spelling of coloUr, you banned that).

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

It was as though a billion non-english speakers cried out in pain, and were silenced.

Enjoy getting dialects to work, too.

Re:Hrmm

[punxking]

Sounds double plus good to me!

Re:Hrmm

[RAMMS EIN]

And what about perfectly fine words or costructs that your software fails to recognize? And what about people with speech impairments?

I think the way Konqueror has it now is best: highlight words it thinks are wrong, but still accept them when you tell it to.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Should I have mentioned that it was a lame joke.

This is slashdot, that's pretty much a given.

Re:Hrmm

[qw0ntum]

There are three computers in my house (four if you count the unused old laptop). I am on the computer for at least 3 hours a day at home (minimum!), plus at least 2 hours at school. Nonetheless, I am the valedictorian of my high school. The key is what the computer is used for. I read /. headlines everyday, plus news headlines every few days, plus a lot of independent information seeking. If I were to play hours on end of RoN, I probably would not reap as much benefit from the computer. Unless I planned to be a general, that is. ;)

Re:Hrmm

[n3tfury]

Let's get our country to get back to speaking English first. Once companies stop conforming to the Spanish-only speaking "citizens", then we could implement your idea, because i think it's a good one.

"Please press 1 for English"?? F*ck off.

Re:Hrmm

[numbware]

It doesn't mean you don't have friends if you spend time learning through your computer instead of spending every second on AIM. I usually spend time learning C or looking up things on Wikipedia. You can still be on AIM, just leave an away message saying something along the lines of; "Coding a small script for your replacement." Since nothing says usefulness like:

DO;
SHUTUP;
WHILE (1==1);

Re:Hrmm

[Rie Beam]

"My idea (and I'm completely serious, I think this would work if it caught on!) is to get people to use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling of anything they type, and then refuse to transmit anything that's incorrect. People will over time develop impeccable linguistic skills! " ...Or they'll uninstall that program and switch to AIM. No one in their right mind would use that program. I consider myself very literate, but even so, I still use the occasional "brb" or "lol". Does this make me stupid or dyslexic? No, it just means that I have to go, and it's a word that most people mutually understand and respect. I mean, if I started speaking in proper French, would that be considered proper? It's a true language, but no one I speak with knows it enough to bother speaking in it. So why would that be prefered over just simple slang?

Re:Hrmm

[3l1za]

Errr...uhhh no.

Your argument implies that those who are unwilling (or unable) to learn grammar and spelling as it stands would somehow be willing to expend the effort to learn grammar and spelling when presented with correct examples of it ad hoc. Or perhaps "the osmosis effect"?

Aren't most textbooks and many periodicals in correct grammatical form and with a limited # of typos? Yet these people--seeing those examples--have still not learned (so much for osmosis).

Perhaps our written world would be more correct but when you get those folks out into the speaking world again, there's no reason to believe that having had someone correct their written correspondence would result in their mental acuities improving.

Re:Hrmm

[slapout]

Sounds like a good idea for some sort of plug in. If there was something that was right, but it didn't recongize it, you would have a button to override it. And you could pick which language you want to check. It might even be could for learning another language. Once you learn some it, you begin to try to talk to others in it and the program helps you correct your mistakes!

Re:Hrmm

[xenocide2]

Thats why I installed Linux; to eliminate the game distraction and find something productive to do. Then I found /. .... =(

Re:Hrmm

[oobob]

That's one of the best ideas I've ever heard. One of my friends in high school was a grammer nazi, and his complaining about my grammer eventually got so annyoing that I started punctuating. After about 2 years of typing correctly I stopped making most grammatical errors. If I ever have kids, I'm going to make a program that does that for their IM programs, and give them the condition that if they want their own computer they have to use the modified client. My dad tricked me into developing an interest in learning by buying me a computer, and I think it was the best parental decision he ever made.

Re:Hrmm

[CoolGopher]

Think about it. We could have an entire society where everyone speaks perfectly clear, grammatically precise day-to-day English (or whatever language you speak in your country)!

And the language would never evolve.

Or alternatively, the language would evolve in the direction set by certain Large Corporations. Enter doublespeak plus good.

The language defines what we can think about, and how we think about those things. It is not a good thing to attempt to restrict it, since by doing so we are restricting people's thoughts.

Having said that, I'll continue to make fun of anyone using 1337 5p33k.

Re:Hrmm

[erroneus]

Actually, when I was younger, I was on BBSes all of the time. I found that people would take me more seriously when I wrote better. Prior to that, I hated English and couldn't write worth anything -- I was all about math and science. Using the BBSes balanced me out nicely.

Like anything else, it's all about how it's used... and perhaps even who is using it. That said, it's important to note that I am not a member of the masses... so how do the masses respond? How do they perceive computers, how they work and what they're for?

Re:Hrmm

[Shulai]

Not.
Computers are not smart. Computers are just tools. You can get better results with them, but tools aren't supposed to be in charge.
I'm using the Konqueror browser. It's putting a lot of words in red, because I'm not writing in Spanish.
Even beyond the multilanguage issue, your checker dictionary can lack some words, and also you can mispell a word into a different valid word, maybe a grammar check could detect it, but it's hard, grammar checkers usually sucks, and we can't even think on context checks...

So, checkers are to help people, not to really educate them.

Re:Hrmm

[lachlan76]

IM is supposed to be similar to conversations, and if you have to type in proper english to be able to so something, then it would be much harder to use.

For example:

brb
I will be right back.

Which one looks easier to do? There is a speed up of over six times by using the abbreviation.

And then there are other aspects, like when I'm trying to talk about technical stuff, or fix problems for someone.

lachlan@123.123.123.123, p/w abc
Connect to 123.123.123.123 using the username lachlan. The password is abc.

There is a reason why we use things like this. Because they work. Language isn't meant to be a set of laws, it's supposed to be a way of conveying information. We need to start treating it that way.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, iChat implements half of your plan; a spell-check underlines any words it believes to be spelled wrong in red.

Re:Hrmm

[metlin]

We could have an entire society where everyone speaks perfectly clear, grammatically precise day-to-day English

Damn, that would put the Slashdot editors out of job, for one.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no official national language.
I repeat: there is no official national language.

Oh, by the way, let's get out country to get back to speaking native tongues first. Once these stupid white people stop thinking their "Americans", then maybe we can kick them back to Europe and get out of these damn reservations.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

So, I learn to speak from old Kings Quest game. I get good grades. Look good grades. I turn out fine. Kick cat. Empty chamber pot.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why you can have 2 or 3 computers in your house (wife + 2 kids + server)

If you've started referring to your computers as "the wife and kids", then you really should lay off the /. for a while.

Re:Hrmm

[peragrin]

My father tricked me into programing by buying a computer that had very few games that i could get easily for it. Ahhhh the days of Basic and a TI/99 4A .

Oh well i can't program anything useful anymore, but I can use and configure any computer. I can sit down at any machine and start working my way around it in no time. What is really scary is I can then apply that knowledge faster.

Actually learning multiple computer OS's is like learning multiple languages, The first couple are a pain but after that they start to get easier. The more you learn, the more you see the minor flaws in between the different systems, and you then chose the system with the flaws you can live with the easiest.

Well this is way off-topic but it's so far down the chain no mod will ever see it.

Re:Hrmm

[leonids]

Computer use in the school is still a fairly new tool. We aren't adept at producing good on-screen content for learning, yet.

In fact, most school teachers aren't making a conscious effort to fully utilise computers for education in a proper manner. All kids get to dabble in are fanciful 'educational' programs, which IMO are just 99% spoonfeeding. A book will do many times better.

Of course, we can't deny that interactivity of these educational programs can spice things up and raise interest. However it gives no credit to the potential of the computer/Internet! Once the kids reach home, they are back to IRC, IM, shoot-em alls. How many kids want to listen to a talking periodic table or mindlessly key in answers to 1+1 at home?

I believe someone mentioned in a post further down: teach them more, teach them to really use the computer. Maybe learning the bash shell can be a bit nasty, but there are certainly limitless other things such googling for information, doing real research, programming, photo/video editing. In this age, these activities are not as outrageous for kids as we think.

Re:Hrmm

[radio.cgt]

This is what happens when children use the internet too much.

It's SFW, BTW, OMGROFLBBQ!!1*.

*yeah, I know, no need.

Re:Hrmm

[andreyw]

I'm glad you're not my parent. With you I'd probably be still in publik skool, failing horribly. Oh yeah, I've had 5 in my room until this fall, when I had to get rid of all the obsolete crap in my room. I needed the desk space for homework, y'know. Hehe. I also attended the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy, btw. Now its time for me to get my paper diploma at UIC. Right, so... the den... I've got an Amiga A3000, a Pentium Pro server, a dual Pentium Pro server, a clone dual-604e PowerMac and EISA 486. 4/5 run debian. The Amiga doesn't have a keyboard, but amiboot loads the kernel just fine - I just can't get anywhere else with it.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, because it's much better to have one television per person in a household than one computer per person in a household.

The thing is that computer use today by children is different than ten and twenty years ago. When I was a kid, I used a computer to set up a BBS. I had to learn how to write software, build my own systems, troubleshoot, deal with the telephone company, understand telephony issues so that I could operate a 32-node BBS and many other things. The computer was a tool, a toy and a machine to explor - just like a mechanic who learned by playing with cars throughout his youth.

But today, as witnessed by my own siblings who are still under age, computers are just a substitute for the telephone and television. Kids play videogames, chat on AIM and hookup through their computer. But it's a toy - not a tool. Not an educational utlity. They dont' explore it. If something breaks, they whine to mom and dad to take it to the shop to be fixed. They don't learn how to program. They don't learn how to build their own machine. They don't learn how to troubleshoot. They don't learn new things with it. The most they learn is how to use a word processor and surf the net.

You can't just throw an encyclopedia in front of a child and expect them to become a genius. You have to teach them to read and comrephend before they can make much use of the shelves of Britannica volumes. Likewise, you have to teach your children to be curious and want to learn rather than to be passive and only learn when instructed.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

boss, is that u?

Re:Hrmm

[Severious]

I am a Linux newbie but one of the things that really impressed me was when I started up GAIM in Mandrake and it had a spell checker built in. I am a horrible/lazy speller and it is a feature I love.

Re:Hrmm

[starwed]

>>Half-Life 2 is not a learning experience. How Stuff Works can be. I don't know. I transitioned from C to C++ by messing around with the HL1 source code.

Re:Hrmm

[kwerle]

My idea (and I'm completely serious, I think this would work if it caught on!) is to get people to use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling of anything they type, and then refuse to transmit anything that's incorrect. People will over time develop impeccable linguistic skills!

That's the lamest idea I've heard in a while. Computers are supposed to make things easier. Instead of failing

OMW 2 store, then BRB

the computer should expand it to be

I'm on my way to the store, then I'll be right back.

People don't (generally) type shortcuts because they don't know any better - they do it because it is faster and/or they're lazy (notice 3 contractions in that statement). Or they do it because they've learned it from chat rooms. If IRC servers (etc) expanded all these shortcuts, folks would learn correct forms by reading them - which is where they're learning the incorrect forms now.

In short: positive reinforcement is better than negative.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

The answer is simple: Use foreigners to take you all to task on British English. The English, after all, invented the language.

As in:
And which country's grammar and spelling would be determined the correct one? Take English for example. We have American English, British E[]nglish and "Slashdot English".

A joke perhaps: An[] American, an Englishman[] and an Australian connect to a spelling correcting chat room and nothing is said.

Should I have mentioned that it was a lame joke? ...

Not as lame as mine.

Re:Hrmm

[apostrophesemicolon]

I see several people replying to this refer to Konqueror.. would th eprogram actually recognize on-purpose word tweaks like "KONQUEROR"? or warez or other widely-accepted expressions?

another thing, I think people speak in slang in part because slangs have a function to let people talk in more intimate/familiar/laid-back situation, and they often let people get ideas across faster and better. Slangs also help the language itself grow (e.g. the term 'Slashdotted')

Forcing grammatically correct typing in chat clients will only lead to discouragement in using them, and would still channel their way of talking "misgrammatically" somewhere else..

remember, negative enforcement often leads to dissatisfaction and that leads to fight-backs, or at best, correct conducts based on submission.

I would positive enforcements (specifically for the grammar issue in chat clients) such as:
-games (like YahooIM games) that's based on words
-predictive text completion (computer predicts likely word to be typed [like in MSWord] that people can press TAB to let computer completes. This way users can see what their spelling is supposed to be. I dont know how many americans i know confuse the word THEY'RE and THEIR.

Re:Hrmm

[meatspray]

ERROR: Cannot send Instant Message(R). Last Message did not contain "So easy no wonder it's number one. I'm going to get a Coke."

Re:Hrmm

[murdocj]

It might also lead to people being able to read, write, and speak to each other. It's true that there's a balance between innovation and sterility in language. But let's not confuse "variations in language" with "2 lazy 2 bother larning reding or writin".

Re:Hrmm

[TCM]

I find it particularly sad that the opposite of "death" was ticked as correct.

Re:Hrmm

[Javagator]

I have two kids in high school who are straight A students. We have three computers, including a computer in each kid's bedroom. I don't know how they would get through school without a computer. They use the internet for research, prepare professional looking reports using MS word, use PowerPoint for their classroom presentations, and use e-mail to communicate with other students when doing group projects. Our kids know what's expected of them, and they get it done, plus we are lucky enough to have a public high school where most kids take their school work seriously.

Re:Hrmm

[quantumraptor]

I am a freshman in hioghschool. In my room, I have 6 computers (adsl modem(pentium 133), Gigabit router(pentium 3 550), Personal machine(2x opteron 250),asterix server(pernitum 4 2.0),Apple powerbook 12", and an IBM R51). I also have three activ phone lines, 3 phones, an X-box, a 26" tv, a DVD player, 2 20" crt moniters, a model m, and more than 400 books.

My lowest semseter grade is a 98.
My lowest single grade is an 89.

Re:Hrmm

[bird603568]

want to know what else screws people up? sight reading. in elementry school somebody thought it was a better idea than phonics. so instead i knowing the sound you dont quote me memorize the parts. damn howard county (thats were i went to school). they always try their new fangled things here. example: station would be read stat-eye-on. also it dosent help that im dyslexic and disgraphic.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

hmmm... incredibly spoiled...

Re:Hrmm

[iocat]

Most people get basic sentence structure right. Where I see a horrid batch of grammar crimes in in suffixes and word agreements, especially for some reason in California (maybe because the high rate of immigration here means there are a lot of new or first generation English speakers).

Signs like "Fish & Chip, $5" or "All player must register before going on ice" are so common here, it kind of makes me sick.

Still, English has been moving since Old English from a tense and ending based grammar and towards a word order based grammar (think of how weird "yoda talk" seems, even when it isn't technically grammatically incorrect, and understand it just fine you can), so we may just be losing those agreements at the end of words, because the sentence structure dictates the meaning without them. It's still grating to me, but I bet none of the old fogeys in Shakespeare's time were down with the great vowel shift.

Re:Hrmm

[John Courtland]

Absolutely Beautimus...

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a fucking IM program?! Speech impairments? Are you a moron, or do you simply believe that not being able to form a coherent sentence on a computer screen is in some way impairment? What, you think that people with a lisp are going to have problems and or are going to be made fun of on IRC?

I think if you're stupid enough that you consistently fuck up (grammatically or otherwise) 10% of whatever drivel that you decide is worthy to pass on to your friends via IM that the computer should literally kick you in the balls. It'll have a little leg with a little foot, and a hydraulic/pneumatic actuator, and it'll kick those little bastards so hard that the receiver will be instantly sterilized--and they'll swell up to grapefruit size so all the other idiots out there will know that you're a dipshit too.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

That said, it's important to note that I am not a member of the masses... so how do the masses respond?

Really? Care to explain what makes you so different and sets apart from the masses? Mr. Elitist.

Re:Hrmm

[dshaw858]

Half-Life 2 is not a learning experience.

I'm going to blame Slashdot on all of my sub-A grades now. And I'll blame the intarweb in general on all my A's... or perhaps vice versa!

- dshaw

Re:Hrmm

[iocat]

This is totally true. If you write well, people pay way more attention to your written words, and give them more weight, even if your arguments or ideas are pretty stupid.

You could have the best idea in the world, but if you WRITE IT IN ALL CAPS AND SOMEHOW ADD 1s TO YOU'RE EXCLAMATION POINTZ NO 1 WILL LISTEN!!!1!!!

Re:Hrmm

[gui_tarzan2000]

"Take english for example. We have American english, British english, Australian english and slashdot english."

Don't forget urban english, farmer english, southern english, chat room english, outsourced tech support english...

Re:Hrmm

[Psychofreak]

I think that is one of the few arguments I have heard in support of Konqueror.

Re:Hrmm

[Thundrbo1t]

I have never thought about it that way. I know that I have terrible writing skills and I have found that reading has improved that skill. So making the short cuts spell out into words is a great idea. I know that some of my old co-workers have to get their kids to translate when I am chatting with them. A college teacher told me one time that the more advanced technology gets the more the masses get ignorant\lazy. Think about it how many of you pick up or click on a calculator to do simple math that you should be doing in your head.

Re:Hrmm

[ichimunki]

You jest, but I had to actually explain the meaning of "BTW" in a teleconference today (and not because I'd used the acronym). :)

As to the idea that computers hurt learning: bullshit. They facilitate learning. They might not be great for some kids' grades, but grades ain't learning.

Re:Hrmm

[Moocowsia]

I'm not sure about you, but since I didn't really get into the computing world until about 98' I learned to type quickly on irc and forums. My grammar might not be perfect, but I doubt it's a result of leet speak.

Re:Hrmm

[zx75]

I know what you mean... and I really detest it when what I want to do is play Half-life 2, but what I should be doing is my homework assignment. Why? Because I procrastinate by not doing homework, but I feel guilty and frustrated so I don't get any enjoyment out of Half-Life 2, so instead of doing either... I post here. Damn. I really should get back to work.

What's worse though is I've wasted entire hours staring at my computer's wallpaper...

Re:Hrmm

[YOU LIKEWISE FAIL IT]

Easy for you to say - I've never found a spelling engine that wouldn't flag my given name as an indecipherable misspelling unless it recognises capitalised words as proper nouns.

So Everyone Would Just Talk Like This, Unless You've Cracked The Natural Language Problem. ( For some strange reason, when I was learning to write, I put everything like this. )

( It is a very cool idea though. :-) )

Re:Hrmm

[Anubis350]

::chuckles::

I already had /. when I switched to linux, my main problem came in discovering my copies of the various versions of UT ran on linux......

Re:Hrmm

[fciron]

I was going to make a similiar point about the involvement of the user.

My son has been using computers for ten years yet has no idea how to troubleshoot the slightest problem or how to design an efficient search. Kids learn to click on pretty pictures and cut and paste their home work together. The computer enables a sort of mental laziness.

One can use a computer for hours a day and not learn anything about computers or the subjects one is supposedly working on.

The reason multiple computers is a correlated to poor performance may be that it is an indication of unsupervised computer use. If there is only one computer it is probably in a public room not a bedroom.

Another thought, the internet encourages academic sloppiness. My son did a paper on Curt Cobain and when I reviewed it the writing style was all wrong (it was boring.) So I checked his history to see his sources and I found three sites with an identical biography. None of these site gave a citation for the bio and my son had just cut it up for his paper. I sat his butt back down at the computer and emailed the URL's to his teacher.

In Summary: GUI's make you lazy. Supervise the kids and use citations!!!

Re:Hrmm

[erroneus]

Elite? No... I'd say more along the lines of social outcast... or more accurately, misfit. I just never fit in, if you must know or if you really care. I don't purport superiority, just that I never fit in with other kids... still don't really. They say there are drugs for that... the social anxiety disorder... but I've never been formally diagnosed so maybe it's all in my head. In either case, you make quite an assumption with your "Mr. Elitist" sentence fragment. Asshole.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Computer literacy is still a minority position.

Re:Hrmm

[JustOK]

a spell-check underlines any words it believes to be spelled wrong in red.

...and it ignores words it believes to be spelled wrong in black.

Re:Hrmm

[happyemoticon]

As a student of English Literature (both capitalized, yes) I have to say that I disagree. This is a great basic idea, if a bit facist. One skill anyone can benefit from is being able to write and speak very good Standard English.

Standard American English isn't exactly what most, say, white middle class Americans use. What any kind of interactive tool would be useful for is people further from this sanskrit we're calling SAE, like immigrants and ethnic minorities, who get shit on for not speaking it well enough. I'm not saying, "level all cultural distinctions," I'm pointing out some facts which aren't likely to change any time soon whether we like them or not.

Re:Hrmm

[MrResistor]

Have you actually used Microsoft's grammar checker? I have to turn it off, as it's constantly trying to "correct" perfectly good sentences (which I wouldn't mind if its "corrections" were even close to reasonable).

The real problem, though, is that computers do the work for you, so there's no real need to actually learn it. You see the same problem with kids who're allowed to use calculators in math class.

Re:Hrmm

[KhanAFur]

IMs and chat can be used in improving spelling with out forcing someone to spell something correctly. Talking in IMs with my friends significantly increased my ability to spell back in middle school and high school. When talking in an IM with spell check turned on I had immediate feedback when I misspelled a word. After correcting the word a few times I usually remembered the correct spelling. I would much rather send something that was correct than send something that wasn't. I don't misspell things because I'm too lazy to put the correct thing in, I just don't know when it is correct and when it isn't. After seeing the correct way enough I am able to replace the wrong way with the correct way. I didn't need something stopping be from sending a message if something was wrong with it. This was much easier and more pleasant than any other way I tried to learn to spell.

Re:Hrmm

[my_fake_account]

whew!

One of the computers in my house is an Apple IIe-- though the girls only bang on the keyboard right now.

"computer-based learning should preferably guarantee that a student meets the class requirements and has an opportunity to extend their knowledge beyond the "lowest common denominator" teachings."

Well, television-based learning has been around for a long long time and I challenge you to find any science related programming on PBS that goes past the freshmen level.

I've been watching biology shows on PBS for more than 20 years, and I've never seen anything more advanced than my AP Bio course in High School. I'm assuming the other sciences are the same, but I'm not qualified to say (well, ok, I took a lot of Chemistry, and that is nonexistent on PBS).

Really all PBS does, other than bio (almost exclusively animal behavior, with the annual human development show) is theoretical physics, and the way they present it, how can anyone take it seriously? Might as well be a psychic.

It is a great disservice to the public that quality freshman-sophomore level science and math is not *always* on the television. And after that has been achieved, junior-senior and graduate level. I think everyone can learn. And I think everyone can learn *a lot*. Putting it in passive TV mode would accomplish that.

For example-- Zoboomafoo is an excellent show. My 2 and a half year old daughter has learned about animals that I have never heard of a year ago. She can tell you what they eat and when they sleep. That is awesome. The show is entertaining and informative.

Why can't there be a show like that about all facets of science? (There kind of is for math-- Cyberchase-- but only the live-action part is worth watching-- the cartoon part really sucks-- they think they need a contrived plot to teach, but they don't-- kids like to learn).

Chemistry is especially important. I think everyone should know that if you get curing concrete or plaster-of-paris on your skin it's going to burn like a son of a bitch. Don't go in the manure pit (you won't come out again). Experience is not the way to learn that kind of thing.

The Liedenfrost effect is really cool-- everyone should know about that.

Stuff like that.

TV has failed us. Computers are failing us too.

Re:Hrmm

[LXtran_arrow]

When I was in grade school (the 1950's) there was a serious movement among the teachers (mostly coaches) in my little farm community to limit the use of the library. They felt STRONGLY that it got in the way of academic performance.

I know you can see this one coming ... . What it got in the way of was quietly accepting all the errors in the text books and the lesson plans. Kids who read a lot tended to question (and correct) a lot. Not the favorite thing of a bunch of jocks turned teacher.

As an anthropologist, I can tell you that education has far more to do with making children into immaculate members of the culture than it does with teaching them useful skills, facts, or how to leverage what they have learned into still more learning.

Re:Hrmm

[khrtt]

lachlan@123.123.123.123, p/w abc
Wouldn't that rather be:

lachlan:abc@123.123.123.123

Re:Hrmm

[CAIMLAS]

Computers are not a 'fairly new tool' in schools. The American education system is only about 150 years old (the first Department of Education being formed in 1867). The current US Dept. of Education began operating in 1980. Computers have been in schools (I'm guessing) since around 1985, maybe earlier.

That's 20 years - a long enough time for the majority of the teachers that were teaching then to become familiar with them in depth, as well as for the newer teachers to have had computers in schools when they were kids themselves.

If the length of time of a practice or tool being employed is an excuse for the lack of performance a specific tool or technique produces, then maybe we should reconsider the educational system. "Outcome-based education has only been commonly practiced for less than 10 years! We need to give it more time to make up for all the damage that the previous methods did!" some proponents of outcome-based education would cry. I'll tell you it's a scarecrow argument, and that the technique evidently isn't working if there aren't results.

No, I think the fact of the situation is that companies have massive advertising campaigns to get schools to buy into the "computers help kids learn" line of bullshit. Yes, they can. But they, in practice, don't - because kids would rather play games, chat, or what have you. That is why computers are in schools. There is no fundamental benefit of having computers in elementry schools, and hardly any for high schools, in my opinion. The focus should be on teaching kids how to read, write, perform mathematical problems, and most importantly, think.

No, our schools have devolved to the point of being not much more than an institutionalized daycare system with systemized distractions to keep the kids from "getting into trouble" (ie, school work), what with shitty and boring worksheets, do-nothing courses, and what have you. It might just be that schools with more computers are more distracted from education from others (ie, "let's spend all the money on the sports team and computers! fuck getting good teachers!"). It might also be that the computers are simply purchased and put in a lab somewhere for kids to use (or not use, because it's always locked - this is the situation in all 3 of the high schools I attended). No, I think computers in school are simply a symptom of the problem: administrators don't give a damn about the actual quality of education, just quantity - if at all. This bleeds off by trying to get the next big fix to keep as many kids in school as possible, and it snowballed into a mess we have now.

Side rant: outcome-based education is, in my opinion, one of the top 5 civil detriments to our society. It pushes those that would normally drop out and become productive (and often competent) laborers or creative business owners to stay in school, raising the cost of keeping someone there that doesn't want to be. It holds back those that want to learn more by not letting them progress at their own rate - because somehow it's not fair to the slow students. In essence, it's everything No Child Left Behind enforces.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a freshman in hioghschool. In my room, I have 6 computers (adsl modem(pentium 133), Gigabit router(pentium 3 550), Personal machine(2x opteron 250),asterix server(pernitum 4 2.0),Apple powerbook 12", and an IBM R51). I also have three activ phone lines, 3 phones, an X-box, a 26" tv, a DVD player, 2 20" crt moniters, a model m, and more than 400 books.

Wow. What a spoiled brat. Most kids have to work for what they get and they do more than just chat around in IRC with it. When I was your age, I had to bust my ass to earn the money (I even sold my book collection) to afford to buy my own computer. My parents didn't know dick about computers and had nothing to do with my decisions. In fact, they treated it as a toy and forbid me from using the family computer. That's why I worked hard and bought/built my own at your age.

In my room, I had a desk, an alarm-clock-radio and a bed. What kind of parents are buying their children a laptop, xbox, television, dvd player, multiple monitors, phones, etc?

My lowest semseter grade is a 98.
My lowest single grade is an 89.

What the hell is that? Try something the rest of us understand. Do you mean a 3.0? a 3.5? a 4.0? A 3.8?

Re:Hrmm

[mlyle]

As a student of English Literature (both capitalized, yes) I have to say that I disagree

Errors have been found in your post. Your post will not be approved until they're corrected: ...facist...: word not found in dictionary

would be useful for is people further from this sanskrit we're calling: awkward

...distinctions," I'm pointing out some facts which aren't likely to change any time soon whether we like them or not.: dangling participle detected

Re:Hrmm

[ravenspear]

Most people get basic sentence structure right. Where I see a horrid batch of grammar crimes in in suffixes

Keyword *most*.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

May I mention that "My idea" is an exact rip-off of the fantastic book "Eats, Shoots and Leaves." Who knew that the author was a /.er? And how she must cringe every time she sees that particular "misuse" of punctuation.

Re:Hrmm

[taylortbb]

but grades ain't learning.

I don't think I've heard a better statement in this whole discssion.

I am a student still in high school, my grades are ok (80% average, which is typical at my school)( and I am an obsessive computer user, but aren't we all on Slashdot). However, many of my teachers give me poor grades, I don't take notes in class, my assignments are rushed and imprecise. But I'm learning great. I can say I fully understand everything, I am a grade 10 student taking grade 11 chemistry, and I have grade 11 students asking me for help constantly. Marks and learning have no relation, marks are your ability to follow directions.

My marks could be much better, but I'm lazy, and like to spend all my time on the computer. I will agree that for many computers will lower grades, but the system needs to move past our current grading system. I will pay attention in class and understand everything, but I wont take any notes and I wont get around to doing my homework. My understanding of what we are doing is perfect, I get 95%+ on all my tests.

The problem is, my homework is 15-25 questions of the exact same easy sutff, there is no way I will ever do that. It is in no way nessesary to do something 20 times to understand it.

Also, what are the expereinces of others in this area? Most computer obsessives I know have wierd learning styles and are in similar situations. Agree, Disagree? Yourself?

Re:Hrmm

[lachlan76]

Not quite....if you really want me to be specific, then:

echo 'abc' | ssh lachlan@123.123.123.123

Re:Hrmm

[Sidicas]

So Everyone Would Just Talk Like This, Unless You've Cracked The Natural Language Problem.

Your consistant usage of capital letters at the beginning of words makes spaces between the words redundant! A better solution: "SoEveryoneWouldJustTalkLikeThis,Unless You'veCrackedTheNaturalLanguageProblem."!!!

Re:Hrmm

[Fortun L'Escrot]

as a linguist i can tell you this. a computer can never teach a human being language. not unless such a computer as an exhaustive account of grammar. to produce such a database i guess is on par with mapping out the human genome. it is simply too difficult for a computer to follow the infinite variety of sentential constructions a human speaker can come up with.

that said, i do not entirely disagree with your idea to use computers to help people focus their language skills. i just think it would require too much effort.

computers are not a substitute for good parenting or a good education. they can be used to focus the process of teaching and learning, but in and of themselves make poor developmental tools (and this is just my guess as i am not a child psychologist).

still computers can be a learning experience in and of themselves. a properly designed OS will always lead to greater insight about the inner workings of the so-called digital world. any one that grew up "playing" with a unix or unix-variant can attest to this. and i am pretty sure that if studies were done, it would show that those individuals tend to have a different view of gagdetry at large.

still thoguh, like any good christian will tell you, values start with family and community, then school. obviously this study is not looking at the lack of support these children are getting from their family or community. just think about all those kids that use computers because they have no one else to interact and grow with (possibly because everyone else is busy or distracted).

to recap. using computers to police language is a time-consuming endeavour that might solve a problem that might be easier solved with better parenting and maybe good tv or the age-old standard, a good book. but, have you noticed how many typos there are in books nowadays? yucky if you ask me.

ps. i am an anti-grammar nazi.

Re:Hrmm

[dextroz]

The ONLY English, is English FROM England. The rest are products of people's complacency.

Re:Hrmm

[saskboy]

Your research paper wouldn't happen to be about why humans tend to procrastinate on important tasks? Because if so, you could sort of justify posting on /. as important research.

Re:Hrmm

[Malc]

I think it's a perfect opportunity for an insidious English company to infiltrate American schools and get all the Yanks in the world talking properly!

The reality will be other way round though, and just continue what TV has already started.

So who get's to define the correct english?

Re:Hrmm

[Fortun L'Escrot]

computers are not a nexus of distraction like its made out to be. tv, books, or just about anything that can use your attention is a potential point of distraction. maybe we should all live a simpler life. maybe the amish have it right... yea, i think not.

Re:Hrmm

[CAIMLAS]

How do the masses perceive computers?

Words and phrases such as "multimedia", "porn", "complex", "gadgets", "violent games", "expensive", "functionally useless" seem like a fairly complete summary to me.

Re:Hrmm

[al912912]

Von Neumann, 1930's

I have created a machine which performs a large quantity of numerical computations.

A kid at Best Buy, 2004, raised in the IM generation

Excuse me father, could you buy me a machine that performs a large quantity of numerical computations, all my friends have one?

Re:Hrmm

[the_2nd_coming]

that is stupid. that is like saying "who gets to define localizations"

Re:Hrmm

[Mooncaller]

As a student of languages, I must disagree. Much of the so called Standard English is a poor fit of Latin structure on top of a hybrid germantic language. Latin, inturn, was produced by force fitting Greek structure on a basicly Celtic language. The history of the standardization of English is the history of classism. The English, very early on, realised the importance of language as a tool of dominance. The nobility, with its access to classical schooling ( including Latin), used language as a means to effect superiority. I am not saying that there is anything wrong with this, but it needs to be concidered when attempting to define what English is.

The most obviouse example of a miss fit is the infinitive. English realy does not have an infinitive ( specificly, a dative infinitive) as in the sence that Latin has one. English uses a construct to achieve the same concept. Because of this structural difference, infinitives can be split. This has always been the way English ( or more properly the ancestral languages that became English) worked. Force fitting Latin structure on this fails and will continue to fail. It is equivilent to using house paint on stainless steel, or builing an ISP with Windows 98.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

haha
you still can't "write worth anything"

"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"

Re:Hrmm

[tekunokurato]

Eh, it's a nice thought, and I understand the point about writing code very well, but I'm reasonably sure your school'd coders are a pretty damn small subset of the population. The rest of the kids will have been entering a workforce in which typing skills, desktop familiarity, etc., are important skills, and are probably not as intelligent as the average code-contest winner (therefore less able to derive such skills merely from sitting and thinking about it). We're talking about everyone here, not just code classes.

Re:Hrmm

[xenocide2]

Fortunately, UT doesn't run very well on a k6-2 with a gf2. I tried out the 2k4 demo on a whimical lark and discovered that in the absolute worst, not possibly meant for human consumption mode, I got about 3 fps. Lets just say I played a lot of yahoo! games during those years.

Re:Hrmm

[GMC-jimmy]

I'm a single father of a teen-age daughter. She's an Honor student and has been since elementary school.

A couple of years ago one of my cousins had experienced some hard times so she asked if her son could live with me till she gets back on her feet again. He was failing the 4th grade when he arrived, he is now an Honor student too.

I have 6 computers in this house. Each has their own machine. Learning doesn't come from any of these computers, infact they are a distraction. But they are also a reward for working hard.

I don't think computers helped my kids education, but I don't think it hurts either.
I volunteer to help them with homework everyday, if I felt like it or not. I encourage them to get work out of the way so they can enjoy their free time on their computers without worry or stress. I also manage their internet access, when the grades fail so does their net connection. :)

Re:Hrmm

[izomiac]

Your research paper wouldn't happen to be about why humans tend to procrastinate on important tasks? Because if so, you could sort of justify posting on /. as important research.

Hence the reason my last research paper was on message boards.

Re:Hrmm

[Igmuth]

I didn't need something stopping be from sending a message if something was wrong with it.

The ironing is delicious.

Re:Hrmm

[CGP314]

My idea (and I'm completely serious, I think this would work if it caught on!) is to get people to use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling of anything they type, and then refuse to transmit anything that's incorrect. People will over time develop impeccable linguistic skills!

It worked for email.


-Colin

Re:Hrmm

[Moofie]

And anybody who chooses to express themselves in something other than the One True Dialect is not allowed to speak! PERFECT!

Or, NOT.

Re:Hrmm

[notthe9]

My idea (and I'm completely serious, I think this would work if it caught on!) is to get people to use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling of anything they type, and then refuse to transmit anything that's incorrect.
I know legitimate words so esoteric I can stump the Oxford Unabridged, let alone the pathetic word lists I have seen use by spellcheckers. Further, grammar checking is a joke. Let alone the fact that improper grammar is sometimes a great device to utilize to express yourself, we just don't have that good of programs to recognize grammar to begin with! (As an aside, I decided to put this into word, and it turns out the "yourself" in the last sentence ought to be "you.") What if I wanted to have a conversation in another language, express mathematics, use technical or new words, or copy a page of Milton or Woolf? I guess I'm SOL.

People will over time develop impeccable linguistic skills!
If using plenty of profanity on your IM or chat client qualifies, I agree.

Then part II: When speech recognition becomes widespread, make the recognition software only recognize clearly enunciated words (and then check them for grammar!).
As someone who had to go through a decade of speech therapy, I am appalled. I large minority of people have speech impediments of varying degrees. This is not laziness or incorrectness, but genetics and often a physical struggle. A speech impediment, a cold, a bit tongue, or fatigue could make your program unusable.

Think about it. We could have an entire society where everyone speaks perfectly clear, grammatically precise day-to-day English (or whatever language you speak in your country)!
I really don't know what to say to that.

Re:Hrmm

[pilgrim23]

Obviously the answer is not to keep the child away from computers, but rather to keep the child away from academics with agendas and a doctopral committee as muddle headed as themselves...

Re:Hrmm

[jhoger]

My understanding is that some languages do not have a plural form as English does.

Hence "fish and chip, $5"

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

The "Fish & Chip" sign is understandable. It's kind of an advertising gimmick. Having the letters upside down works too. One just needs to be very careful about the choice of errors, as cheapskates read those signs too, and those tend to be lawyers or lawyer wannabes.

It gets anal retentive people in there to complain, and while there, they sometimes make a purchase. I generally try to make the signs inside the store correct, but not even the grammar OCD crowd is perfect.

When we first openned, we made the exterior signs with correct punctuation, but people still complained or misinterpreted them. I figured I should just use it to my advantage instead of worrying about it.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

hahaha brilliant!
I've never laughed this much for weeks, good job!

Re:Hrmm

[lewp]

I know LISP certainly makes it difficult for me to express myself coherently.

All those damn parentheses...

Re:Hrmm

[Tony-A]

Care to explain what makes you so different and sets apart from the masses? Mr. Elitist.

He's a different and unique individual, just like you and me and everybody else.
Some people like to watch the grass grow and converse about same. Some don't. No big deal.
Some consider themselves as more or less representative of the nature of the masses. Some don't. No big deal.
You're allowed to be yourself so long as that does not impinge on others' right to be themselves.
You're not allowed to insist that others must help you be yourself.
Humor can help. You can laugh or you can cry. Laughing's better.

The elitist here is me. I like myself and enjoy myself. With that I do not particularly care what anyone else thinks of me, which does not preclude me from having pointed opinions of other people.

Re:Hrmm

[BlackHawk-666]

Does that mean Scouse and Cockney are 4 valid English, because they are from England? The way those east enders talk is a crime against the language.

Re:Hrmm

[Dachannien]

The day that the person working the drive-thru at McDonalds says "kthxdrvthru" is the day I shoot myself.

Re:Hrmm

[DarkTempes]

it's also alot harder for parents to control computers nowadays, and to use computers in many ways than it was back in the apple IIe days. with the apple IIe the parents could restrict their kids to fun educational games because the entire thing was a single application on a disk. there weren't really any errors or problems to fix, and doing something didn't take very long if you didn't know how to do it as there was not really an OS of any kind. i'd kinda love to see a return of that sorta computer (the linux world is perfect for it with liveCDs), cheap computers, with no hard drive, and just have disc(s) with your applications on them that you insert and use. you can even still have internet with that, the parent/teacher just restricts when they are allowed to have that disc. granted CDs scratch and go bad alot easier than those five and three-quarters diskettes. but it would still be interesting. though i think i would have missed all those hour upon hour gaming bashes on my pentium pro back in my younger years when i was supposed to be working on school work.

Re:Hrmm

[kwerle]

Doing simple math in your head isn't such a great sign of intelligence. Knowing how to do the math is more important than getting the answer.

Yes, doing math in your head is good brain excercise.

As for tech making the masses ignorant/lazy - I'm pretty sure that has been TV's job for ages.

Re:Hrmm

[zallus]

For a look into what language would be like without a set of laws, please see Ahua, the Water Language.

Re:Hrmm

[lothrids]

I have a hard time believing this artical. I have 5 PC's in the house (My Laptop, Wife's Laptop, Oldest Daughters Laptop, Youngest Daughter's desktop, and the family Desktop). Both of my girls are excelling in school. I would have to agree that the problem is stemming from the people who are teaching our children how to use the computers in question. Maybe this is an attempt by the RIAA to stop possible future P2P'ers...

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v173/pizzapirate /distractions.gif

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

that! and another useless program no one uses because it's not cool enough and too geeky!

Re:Hrmm

[Finek]

true, but there are people who just use unnecessarily abbreviations, like l8r or 2morrow

Re:Hrmm

[lachlan76]

I do it all the time, it saves me from typing that extra letter. It's part of the language people use for IM.

Of course, I'm a C/perl person, so I like terse syntax.

Re:Hrmm

[Grym]

This is slashdot, that's pretty much a given.

What's really sad is that Slashdot, a website supposedly for scientifically-minded people can't even understand the basic tenet of science that is "correlation does not equal causation".

All the article said was that they found a correlation between multiple computers in the home and poor academic performance, but that doesn't imply, as the headline states "Too many computers Hurt Learning." It could just mean that spoiled kids with access to computers don't do well in school because they've had everything handed to them. But of course, that wouldn't be as sensational, now would it?

-Grym

Re:Hrmm

[maxwell demon]

Of course language is a set of laws. It's just that those laws are not set in stone.

For example your technical example works only because you used an additional set of laws which is very strict, but known by the other side. Exactly because those rules are that strict, you can safely remove much of the surrounding language structure.

Re:Hrmm

[Esion Modnar]

l337 5p34k c4n 0n1y hur7 gr4d3z.

Wrong. It also hurts my eyes.

Ow.

Re:Hrmm

[lachlan76]

grrr...2mozz i g2 compile xorg

What strict surrounding laws are there in that?

Re:Hrmm

[nick_urbanik]

Which part of England do you mean? People use very different ways of speaking in differnent parts of England.

Re:Hrmm

[pHDNgell]

Heh, that reminds me...here's a conversation I had with a guy at work one day:

aim.png

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually most people are neither different nor unique, an original thought for those people is something to be feared while they wait for rush to tell them what to think next.

Re:Hrmm

[maxwell demon]

Well, I first have to find out what you actually wanted to say ...
(well, it's something about compiling X.org, I think)

Re:Hrmm

[Tony-A]

Oh, most people are different and unique. And they do have original thoughts, just not precisely your "original" thoughts.

Re:Hrmm

[lachlan76]

Somewhere along the lines of:

Ahhh....fuck. Tommorrow I have to compile X.Org.

You can just *SEE* how happy I am about it.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Let alone the fact that improper grammar is sometimes a great device to utilize to express yourself, we just don't have that good of programs to recognize grammar to begin with!

The good programs are pretty good.

Note that they don't have to be perfect. They just have to catch the common mistakes that novices make over and over and over again. When you can intentionally write prose that rarely triggers the grammar checker, then you can safely use "improper" grammar.

I large minority of people have speech impediments of varying degrees.

A good speech recognizer will be highly flexible and trainable. If the impediment is with motor control and not cognition, there should be no problem. The main danger will be of it reinforcing a speech impediment.

Re:Hrmm

[cra]

That would probably never work, since there is currently no software capable of recognizing all correct grammar, and I don't think there will ever be such a program. There isn't even a flawless spell checker available. Another issue is people with dyslexia. Most people I know are able to understand what dyslexians (or whatever they are called in english) mean even if they are not that good at typing. I think the idea is good though, to some extent. Running a spell-checker would certainly teach good spelling, but the spellchecker better be correct!

As for speech recognition and only letting clearly pronounciated words pass: ARE YOU OUT OF YOUR MIND!?!? Why would you cut off people with speech impediments from using this? And people with different dialects? I come from Norway, a country with many dialects that can be pretty different, and none of them are more "correct" than any of the others just because some dialects are more common than others. That's the beauty of language filtered through the human brain; we are mostly able to understand it even if it doesn't sound the same every time. That is what they should try to be speech recognition software able to do, not filter out everything that doesn't sound exactly the same.

Think about it. We could have an entire society where everyone speaks perfectly clear, grammatically precise day-to-day English (or whatever language you speak in your country)!

Indeed! And we might just start the cloning straight away.

Re:Hrmm

[jazman]

> Language isn't meant to be a set of laws, it's supposed to be a way of conveying information.

Spif. Grooble woba nreep quagga wibble, foobar twif naganagga quack twiddle-i doodah.

Translation: yes, but if you make it a complete free-for-all, it will cease to convey information. There have to be rules for it to be effective.

Re:Hrmm

[dossen]

That would not do what you expect. Unless abc is a valid command on 123.123.123.123. And you still have to enter the password (with openssh at least (it must be accessing the tty directly)).

dossen@leela:~$ echo 'this is neither a command, nor a password' | SSH_AUTH_SOCK='' ssh dossen@hermes
Pseudo-terminal will not be allocated because stdin is not a terminal.
Enter passphrase for key '/home/dossen/.ssh/id_rsa':
-sh: line 1: this: command not found

Re:Hrmm

[Quobobo]

So who get's to define the correct english?

Not you :)

Re:Hrmm

[vrai]

I also attended the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy

In the future I suggest you skip the Mathematics and pay more attention to English. For someone purporting to be clever your use of the language is utterly abysmal. I hope for your sake that you get someone else to proof read your resumé.

Re:Hrmm

[TheRaven64]

Correctly applied, computers can aid learning. I have absolutely no skill at all at operating a pen. It has the worst user interface ever designed. My grades in English were consistently Cs, with the occasional B. Once we were allowed to use computers to type essays, they shot to A or A* and stayed there (until I dropped English aged 16). I now get paid for a lot of what I write (with the exception of the stuff I post on /. which is pro bono, and makes far more use of parenthetical clauses than anything I'd expect to sell).

CD-ROM encyclopaedias (when I was growing up) and more recently things like Wikipedia provide a valuable source of information - not as a substitute for books, but as an additional source. When computers are treated as a tool, they are a valuable aid. When they are treated as a toy, or as an end in themselves, they are a distraction (although sometimes an educational one).

I suspect that a lot of the correlation between lower grades and access to multiple computers is a result of parents who treat a computer as a substitute for human interaction. Last century the same parents would have allowed children their own television and let them watch it all of the time. In both cases the parents are at fault, not the technology. Having children is a responsibility, one which it sounds as if you are quite rare in fulfilling.

Re:Hrmm

[flahavin]

Wow.... What a boring life thats gonna be.. i bet this "ideal parents" kids has several magazines under the bed, and spends a lot of "alone" time with themselves. this sounds like something from the flanders family, bed time at 7, "but its still light out"

Re:Hrmm

[lachlan76]

If you change it in a way that it remains understandable, or is easy to pick up, then the rules can change with it.

I'm in a 10 person IM convo, and in an IRC channel with another 800. If you don't type fast, it won't make sense.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

how do you know "Fish & Chip, $5" is wrong? You may only be getting 1 chip.

Re:Hrmm

[CountBrass]

Could someone explain what a Valedictorian and an Hono(u)r student are? We don't have such beasts in England.

Re:Hrmm

[GarrettZilla]

An interesting idea, but I think that there's historical precedent showing it to be unnecessary.

Back in the day, ethereal "chat rooms" involved Morse Code. An even more dense system of abbreviations was codified, and it worked fine.

People have multiple vocabularies - they don't write like they speak, and I've never heard anybody speak like they do in chat rooms. I'm not worried about it.

Re:Hrmm

[Fortran IV]

I also attended the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy, btw. Now its time for me to get my paper diploma at UIC.

My lowest semseter grade is a 98. My lowest single grade is an 89.

My brother and I both grew up having our own color TV set in our bedroom - but I can't remember ever really even using it except when I was sick and lying in bed during the day.

Yes, and some cancer patients go into remission after taking Laetrile. Individual cases do not prove a general trend. That's why statisticians do big massive studies like the one in the article.

Re:Hrmm

[c0p0n]

What added value to communication would this move provide? Annoying first users? There are ppl that simply cannot do grammar and stuff.

PS: I am spanish, so please do not blame my grammar here ;)

Re:Hrmm

[rjshields]

We have American english, Brittish english, Australian english and slashdot english.

Damn those Brittish with their bowler hats and umbrellas.

Re:Hrmm

[pajeromanco]

Let's get our country to get back to speaking English first. Once companies stop conforming to the Spanish-only speaking "citizens", then we could implement your idea, because i think it's a good one. "Please press 1 for English"?? F*ck off.

I think that should be modded "Funny" instead of "Insightful". That kind of thought from someone living in a colony is at least hilarious (and I live in a colony too).

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

We still try to push everyone along at the same pace , where computer-based learning should preferably guarantee that a student meets the class requirements and has an opportunity to extend their knowledge beyond the "lowest common denominator" teachings.

Lowest common denominator teachings are safe for the school, kids learning at their own pace are not. It's politically incorrect to acknowledge that some kids are smarter or try harder than others in school, and if they are seen to get "better schooling" (merely by applying themselves), then it's seen as the school letting down the others.

The only way for a kid to progress noticably faster than the "pack" is to be grouped with people who are also ahead of the pack (e.g. special schools) or use a different system (e.g. home schooling).

Re:Hrmm

[Hognoxious]

Which part of England do you mean? People use very different ways of speaking in differnent parts of England.

I don't have an accent; it's everybody else that does.

Re:Hrmm

[HawkingMattress]

Having Apple II(s) in your house meant you were encouraged to learn stuff, how to program in basic and how computer worked. It could open your mind to new paradigms and all.

For 99% of the child/teenagers, having PCs in your house means you can chat all day about silly things with your friends and that's about it. It's just glorified sms to them. The relation this generation has with the internet is frightening, it doesn't encourage them to learn things, but rather to close themselves even more to the things they don't want to hear about by allowing them to have a permanent "cocoon" of people thinking the same way they do. It closes their mind even more instead of opening it...

Re:Hrmm

[Bastard of Subhumani]

I have 6 computers in this house. Each has their own machine.

A computer is a machine, so why does it need one?

Re:Hrmm

[Bastard of Subhumani]

grammar checkers usually sucks

Can they detects incorrect subject-verb agreement?

Re:Hrmm

[majid_aldo]

Signs like "Fish & Chip, $5" or "All player must register before going on ice" are so common here, it kind of makes me sick.

i guess you'll throw up as soon as you see http://www.engrish.com/

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

So you are saying that in general computers are great tools....

Re:Hrmm

[Aldric]

That sort of thing is designed for SMS, because of the low character limit.

Re:Hrmm

[CaptRespect]

Wow, what a dumb idea. Who would want to use that? Noone.

Re:Hrmm

[MadBabbler]

Bah, I loved my calculator in math class. I have a degree in math now so it didn't seem to hurt me too much.

Re:Hrmm

[Oligonicella]

LOL. Funny. Force fitting concepts like construction techniques or telecommunications software into a discussion of language evolution is a pretty good example itself.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

You get sick with people who can't form plurals? Sound quite petty to me, why not devote your time to stamping out rapper-speak? Surely that's much worse as far as grammar and syntax are concerned.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Just as long as IM clients don't settle for a Microsoft Driven Spelling/Grammar engine. That would just be crap.

Re:Hrmm

[Oligonicella]

Having followed to your decipherment, I can say not many. But, I can also say that it required you to decipher. So, you weren't really using language, only typing gibberish.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck all of you idiots who argue that langauge eveolves. It doesn't.

Oh I don't know, I see evidence of random mutations. Now all we need is evidence of natural selection.

Re:Hrmm

[GPSguy]

I've gotta say: If this idea had come along when my daughter was discovering IM, it would have helped her spelling/grammar. She got through high school with good grades, but has discovered in college that her writing was subject to more critique and perhaps she wasn't as good as she had thought. Or, more precisely, she's decided a lot of the professors are idiots because they've criticized her grammar, spelling and composition style.

Re:Hrmm

[krumms]

In my opinion, SMS has done far more damage to the reading and writing abilities of today's children.

I mean, it's one thing to abbreviate the odd commonly used phrase, but it's another thing to shorthand every fucking word in the english language.

"ur" => "your/you're"
"n" => "and"
"sexc" => "sexy"
"no" => "know"

In some cases they type just as many fucking letters and spell it wrong just for the sake of spelling it wrong ("sexc").

Where's the sense, ffs? :P

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

See that SHIFT key? Can you guess what it does?

Re:Hrmm

[maxwell demon]

What's really sad is that Slashdot, a website supposedly for scientifically-minded people can't even understand the basic tenet of science that is "correlation does not equal causation".

Well, given that the typical slashdot user uses more than one computer, isn't that further proof for the headline thesis? :-)

BTW, there's a high correlation between posting as AC and trolling. Logged-in posters tend to troll less. I conclude that a slashdot account increases intelligence. :-)

Re:Hrmm

[GPSguy]

When my daughter was in grade school, middle school, junior-high and high school, I also offered to help with homework, at least when I wasn't travelling. She declined, usually, because I didn't "do it like the teacher showed us" how to complete their work. That said, several times, I found *I* couldn't understand what the teacher had purportedly taught, and in at least a couple of instances, I found the hand-outs from the teacher were patently incorrect.

We used the computer as a reward for some period of time. We still keep the 2 primary computers in the family room, so parents can keep an eye on what the kids are doing/surfing, and so we can answer questions before they make a wrong assumption on homework before it's committed to paper and a battle ensues to make 'em correct their mistake. I think that's helped. What's also helped is having the knowledge and tools to provide some unobtrusive filters and redirection on the network side when I've suspected the kids were wandering into the unseemly side of the 'Net, or when their behavior suggested they were heading down a pathway we felt was dangerous.

I've got one in college, doing well even if I think she's got more potential than her grades show (simply, I think she'd have better grades if she saw less than about 10 movies a week); one in high school doing well, and almost a poster child for 'Net-based school research, and one in elementary school who is learning how to use and leverage the 'Net in a manner his siblings may never understand.

Managed properly, I think having the computers around is a good thing. I'm just not sure I've learned how to manage them properly just yet!

Re:Hrmm

[GPSguy]

Ah gess y'all ain't frum round heah? (Texian dialect)

Re:Hrmm

[MadBabbler]

Yeah I feel similarly, homework for practice is only useful if you need the practice. There is a difference between understanding how something works and being proficient at it. The easiest way to see this is in a physical arena but the idea is the same. For example, I recently started learning judo. I can understand immediately how a throw is supposed to work but I need to do it dozens of times before I start to feel proficient. High school is mostly a joke but when you get to the point when your studies start to bend your brain you'll need the practice too.

I figured I would play along and do those busywork assignments as minimally as I could afford to keep my grades up. The one that always got on my nerves was the constant reminder to show my work. When I did show my work I would often lose points because my work was "wrong." Then I would have to go and explain that their way wasn't the only way and mine worked just fine. Stupid profs thinking they know stuff.

If you intend to go to college, keep in mind that your grades might be a factor in how much funding you receive. Unfortunately universities have a hard time determining if you have 80% marks because you are stupid or brilliant and lazy. Even more unfortunately academics, and so many other things, seem to be about jumping through hoops.

Re:Hrmm

[GPSguy]

There have been a couple of mainstream articles on the topic of the evolution of English (or whatever we have now) toward an IM-variant. The experts I've seen quoted tend to agree that the language is morphing toward a more streamlined version,and that it's not necessarily bad, although, for us old guys, it's a little disconcerting.

I have, similary, watched the change in the Russian language over the last 20 years. When I studied in Leningrad in the early '70's, I learned a variant of the language... almost a dialect... that was barely understood in Moscow. This year, I had the opportunity to speak to a new faculty member who's from Petersburg... Leningrad... and I found he was considerably less formal and had a lot more foreign word investment in his conversant mode than I'd expected. Didn't make him harder to understand, necessarily, but certainly different.

It's not just the American version of English that is changing, but, I suspect, almost every viable, employed language.

Re:Hrmm

[The-Bus]

How surprizing! You must shew me how to use the King's English more often.

Re:Hrmm

[GPSguy]

Shortcuts aren't the problem. Recognizing the common shortcuts,and allowing incorporation of others would cure that.

The problem arises when someone's not astute enough to convey their meaning in clear, grammatically correct form. I've a lot less trouble with with 'BRB' than '1337 5p34k', and less with '1337 5p34k' than with stupid grammatical errors, lazy spelling errors and syntactical miscues because someone is too lazy (or, submit lame excuse here) to have learned how to write a coherent passage.

I spend a lot of time with math and science. I have to be able to express myself to my peers, the public and to students. If I were to lapse into the mindset of the "changing, evolving language" and argue that errors were a form of expression, I'd not, generally, be able to do that. Just as we encourage our engineers to be precise in how they represent their designs and analyses, they have to be able to document what they're doing, or what they've done, or their work won't be usable.

Re:Hrmm

[ciggieposeur]

Sure, they can still use the public computer in the den, they just don't get the _privelege_ of a private computer.

Unless they work, save the money, buy it themselves, and pay for their own phone line. That's what I did when I was _13_. Back then PC-XT 8MHz was common, and 286 12MHz was state-of-the-art, 2400bps was $100, 9600 was $700.

Of course, we didn't have a "family business", weekly allowances, or weird rules about "rights" and "privileges". If any of us could pay for it, that was evidence of enough responsibility to have it.

Re:Hrmm

[ratamacue]

l337 5p34k c4n 0n1y hur7 gr4d3z

So, are you proud or embarrased that you actually knew how to do that?

Re:Hrmm

[TheRealSync]

Think about it. We could have an entire society where everyone speaks perfectly clear, grammatically precise day-to-day English (or whatever language you speak in your country)!

Considering I live in Denmark, which has about 5½ million people - total - who speak several different dialects, I don't expect seeing this anytime soon.

I don't think it would be possible implementing such a system at all - languages change; and even if it was implemented, I think we would see a lot of time being spent h4x0ring the system, trying to get it to accept 1337 5p34k.

Re:Hrmm

[Tuna_Shooter]

Both my girls (aged 16-14) have their own workstations. They also have some old ThinkPads, which i picked up at a yard sale. My girls are both on the Distinguished Honors List. But last night a few net gaming buddies of mine and i were discussing our kids use of their computers and came to some surprising results. Both of my girls as well as my buddies children have good study habits as do their close circle of friends. All of them do their homework at the same time after dinner and chat online while doing so. Most of their teachers also join their chat rooms in the evenings to assist in their homework. Even though they all use AIM probably reflecting the lowest common denominator i.e. families with AOL accounts I find that they don't use their boxes for gaming as my generation does but rather for socializing.

Re:Hrmm

[flynniec6]

I think the password is wrong in both examples. I can't connect.

Re:Hrmm

[flynniec6]

I still enforce this rule. I take people more seriously online when they can construct a basic sentence and punctuate correctly.

When I'm teaching kids English, I tell them the same. They can be seen as morons or as educated young adults when they want to make a serious point. They can drop back to AOL OMG!!11!!!! LOL whenever they're chatting with their friends.

World class runners don't sprint everywhere but it's nice to have the ability. Same with speaking and/or writing correctly.

Just my 0.0148588 EUR (Live mid-market rates as of 2004.12.07 13:23:59 GMT.)

Re:Hrmm

[wadam]

I don't know. I have a real problem with prescriptive grammar in general. Not that I don't speak what others would call grammatically correct english, but I don't think that, say, African-American vernacular is less grammatically correct. It's just grammatically different, with its own stable rules of syntax. One thing to be aware of is that rules of grammar, as they are prescribed in U.S. english textbooks, are not as they have always been, nor are they the same as UK or Singapore grammatical rules. If you read Shakespeare or Chaucer, or even Thomas Payne or Nathaniel Hawthorne, you will find certain grammatical structures that are still recognizable today, but that are obsolete and considered grammatically wrong in contemporary writing. The same is true crossing borders: there are certain constructions that are common in the UK, for instance, that we would not use here.

I do appreciate the sentiment that people should learn to speak properly. Certain common colloquialisms do bother me. On the other hand, though, we have to understand that grammar is no fixed thing, and prescriptive grammar is never anything more than the rantings of those who feel that they are superior and deserve to be emulated.

Re:Hrmm

[hashwolf]

Yes I can imagine an IM wich refuses to submit messages not written in grammatically correct English.....

[TBlair] Do you think we should encourage a democratic Palestinian leadership?
[GBush] Yes
[TBlair] Do you have any ideas on how me might proceed in order to do this?
[GBush] Yes
[TBlair] Can you give me the specific details?

[TBlair] Hello?
[TBlair] Are you still there?

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know that it is that bad, 'death' is a noun and 'live' serves as two kinds of verb and one kind of adjective - and the "opposite" relationship is appropriate with either unless the test specified a rule about matching parts of speech.

Testing these sorts of word relationships seems mostly futile to me though, english and the universe are so complicated that I could make a completely valid case for 'orange' being the opposite of 'left' without trying very hard. Even without being a smartass is the opposite of 'left' : 'right' 'stayed' or 'kept'?

Re:Hrmm

[nospmiS remoH]

Thanks for leaving out notherner English, eh? You insensitive clo^U^U^U hoser!

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

E-speak abbreviations like 'brb' and 'ianal' can be handled by being auto-expanded by an nice client, even at the reader's end if necessary. It's not such an issue of grammar. If I typed 'brb' and you saw "I will be right back" wouldn't that be OK?

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

In Germany people can figure out from which village someone comes from by small things in his grammar. We are talking villages which are 5 km apart here which speak a different dialect.

Re:Hrmm

[unikorn]

Took me a while to figure out.. "Text Speak Can Only hurt grades" foudn this useful site as well... http://home.no.net/hellshl/main/translate.html

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

What about the Liza Dolittles of the world? You'd silence the entire east end of London (and not to mention the entire US) in one fell swoop!

Then again, I'm warming to the idea! :-)

Re:Hrmm

[Oculus Habent]

16 years ago, the elementary school in which I studied had all of two Apple II computers that were closely supervised for nearly insignificant use. When my family moved across the country, my new school had Apple IIe computers and ImageWriter II printers in every room. We had the ability to play games during an unstructred portion of class. All the available games were, of course, educational. We could also use them to type. My typing has long been superior to my handwriting, and so I made substantial use of the computers in that capacity.

Eight years ago, the computer lab in my high school was being upgraded from Mac SE (1987 computers) to Mac IIci and IIfx (1989/1990). The one computer in the library with special terminal-based software to access the university inter-library catalog was replaced with a Mac IIci with Netscape 1.1. Over the next two years, a massive chang occured. The year I graduated, the school had a 56k dedicated data line, and we could use the Internet for research with . The year after I graduated, there were dozens of iMacs, and the school had a T1.

It's not that computers are new to schools. It's that new computers are new to schools. The World Wide Web is still so new that it continues to undergo revolutions every few months. We jumped from the scriptless, frameless world of Netscape 1.1 to the Flash-enabled, java-based, dynamic pages of now in just a few years. Educators are still struggling with the changes and how to incorporate them.

When I was a freshman in high school, I helped a night-class of teachers learn to use ClarisWorks and HyperCard so they could assist their students. I know, first-hand, how far behind technology most educators are.

I'm not saying that it's good or right or even acceptable that education lags behind in this way. I know that it is damaging. I know that it is a problem, and that it needs a swift correction. I also know that swift is not a word often used when describing educational change. We can stand back and say, "That's wrong." Dissidence is an important part of society. But, we should, at the same time, be stating what we view is right. Otherwise, we are simply compounding the problem.

As I mention in my first post, computers need to be made into tools of extended learning, not desktop slide-shows or free-reign time sinks.

Change is hard. Give it some time. I'm not saying you should stand back and watch the demise of education, but you can't expect it to change overnight.

Re:Hrmm

[atomic-penguin]

...Brittish English...

I think that is supposed to be British English, you must be speaking the Slashdot dialect.

Seriously though, there is a gaim plugin that autocorrects certain patterns. Would it be that hard to modify it to not correct them but highlight the misspelled words and point out the mistakes to the typist?

Re:Hrmm

[AttilaSz]

to use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling of anything they type, and then refuse to transmit anything that's incorrect
Users don't like software that limits and annoys them. Nobody would use it. Imagine a phone that doesn't transmit grammatically incorrect spoken sentences. Would you use it?

Re:Hrmm

[fubar1971]

one in high school doing well, and almost a poster child for 'Net-based school research,...

I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you probably taught all of you children the different ways to collect research information. I know this seems to work well with my children. When they ask me to help them on line to get research information, the first thing I say is "Well lets look in the encyclopedia, go to the library, get the dictionary out, etc. first". This way they are learning about all of the different places information can be found and how to find it. Now when they do get on line to do research, they have a greater apprecaition for the computer and 'Net.

Re:Hrmm

[Cyn]

Sounds double plus good to me!

(clippy pops up on screen)

It seems like you're trying to transmit something witty. Your grammar is incorrect and the transmission has been denied. Try these substitutes:

1) Sounds doubleplusgood to me!
2) Sounds plusgood to me!
3) Sounds good to me!
4) Proles shouldn't code office assistants, disable clippy.

Re:Hrmm

[BorgCopyeditor]

Prior to that, I hated English

Try "before": it's better.

Re:Hrmm

[sionnach]

But syntax is important, and knowing when to use the correct syntax is VERY important: You wouldn't talk to the Queen the same way you talk to Snoop Dogg any more than you'd try to compile Assembly with gcc! Being able to communicate in the vernacular and adapting as it does is important, but simple things like tact and decorum dictate certain rules like kids don't swear in front of their parents and you don't yell at police officers, even though such behavior is acceptable in other social situations. Guess the word I'm looking for is protocol, but it does seem a bit starched for the conversation.

Re:Hrmm

[Cyn]

You understand the 4.0 grading scale, but you don't understand a percentile scored test?

No wonder you posted anonymously.

Re:Hrmm

[AhZuhl]

I agree!

The thing about computers in the classroom and so on being a too unfamilar is a misnomer.

When I was in elementary school in the 70's we had computers (albeit Apples) to help children.

They've evolved over the years. I've seen anything from a MAC to Linux being used in learning with children.

I do believe that the computers of "Today" are unfamilar to parents. The computer has evolved into a massive things today. Massive in knowledge and content, not in size. Although they can be pretty massive depending on the system you choose to us.

Giving them time however is another story. I just finished reading this great book. In the story it comes to these two characters. The one character is a mighty being with vast knowledge of all time. The mighty character mentions to the second character that people of earlier years were much smarter. And pointed out how structures were built compared to today. I was slightly blown away. We don't use our minds today like people of earlier years. We do rely on levels, calculators and stud finders.

I don't believe it has anything to do computers in ones home though. This changing of the minds took place long before electronics came into the picture.

I believe the introduction to electronics just enabled people to use their minds in a different way.

I'll just leave it at that!

Happy Computing!

Re:Hrmm

[Jo Owen]

Gaim actualy already does this.

Preferences -> Interface -> Conversations -> Message Text -> Highlight Misspelled Words.

Re:Hrmm

[tkg]

All the article said was that they found a correlation between multiple computers in the home and poor academic performance, but that doesn't imply, as the headline states "Too many computers Hurt Learning." It could just mean that spoiled kids with access to computers don't do well in school because they've had everything handed to them. But of course, that wouldn't be as sensational, now would it?

Or it could mean that kids are spending their time playing games and visiting chat rooms instead of studying and their parents aren't paying attention. I had a similar problem with my son when he got his Nintendo. His grades would start to slip and I'd have to take it away until he brought them back up. He finally got the message and is in graduate school now working on his Phd in chemical engineering.

Re:Hrmm

[TRACK-YOUR-POSITION]

On the other hand, a lack of correlation usually implies a lack of causation.

Re:Hrmm

[Daagar]

If you're going to get distracted, you're going to get distracted. It doesn't matter if it is the computer sitting in front of you, or the sun shining brightly outside drawing you to the pool/gym/field, or the fresh powder drawing you away for a weekend of snowboarding. Heck, if you are the type that is going to procastinate, you'll stare at the walls if nothing else. The computer is an excuse, not a reason.

Re:Hrmm

[It'sYerMam]

Never mind every single English dialect. Who could forget Scottish (Och aye!) Mancunian (That's 'angin!) Liverpudlian (Calm down!) etc.
We shouldn't clamp down on dialects, rather thwack people for not typing 'you' 'I' ''' 'your' and not using the shift key.

Re:Hrmm

[It'sYerMam]

Technically a typo, not a grammar problem.

Re:Hrmm

[It'sYerMam]

dialect: a variety or subdivision of a language

accent: manner of speaking or pronouncing

An accent does not use different words. I'm sure there is a Texan dialect, but that wasn't an example ;-)

Re:Hrmm

[35ft_twinkie]

What a double-plus good idea!

Then our language is controlled by machines. It does not evolve and we all talk and sound the same.

I understand your motivation, but I respectfully disagree.

Re:Hrmm

[Mazem]

Perfect grammar, spelling, etc. is not nearly as important to communication as schools would have you believe. The bottom line is whether or not your target audience understands what you are trying to say - style be damned. The emphasis on correct spelling and grammar is not emphasized because it has immense value to society, but rather because it is a popular status symbol.

Re:Hrmm

[txmadman]

Agreed, and it isn't just kids or college students. I am a 42 year old consultant who has a meeting in 2 hours and a half-completed draft document to present therein. My well-educated and disciplined mind says I should put off working on that and take a quick swim through /. in order to...well, something.

As for the kiddos, I kill the AOL IM port at 8 pm on school nights.

Re:Hrmm

[TCM]

I don't think teaching children basic concepts of opposites should allow to change word type at will. After all, he didn't write "intolerant" as the opposite of "tolerance".

Anyway, the point was "pro" vs. "noob" so let's have a hearty laugh and forget it.

Re:Hrmm

[cmdr_beeftaco]

fyi abc is a horrible password. I would recommend "password" or simply "pass"

Re:Hrmm

[zlyoga]

"My idea (and I'm completely serious, I think this would work if it caught on!) is to get people to use IM and chat room clients that check the grammar and spelling of anything they type, and then refuse to transmit anything that's incorrect. People will over time develop impeccable linguistic skills! " That or people could just shun anyone who spells poorly or uses bad grammer. In 7th grade I was introduced to the wonderful world of text based MUDs and I typed horribly and I did the whole spelling you "u" type thing. But people yelled at me every time I did that in the MUD so I stopped eventually :)

Re:Hrmm

[Anubis350]

yeah, unfortunately for my work it runs just fine on an amd 2400 xp with a gig of ram and a gf fx 5800. UT2004 has been my nemisis all smester so far, well that and /. of course.

you might want to try tuxracer if you want a 3d game thatll probly run on your specs, or one of the older quake games....

Re:Hrmm

[DudeTheMath]

Now, having said that, I did have a computer and phone in my room before I turned 18.

I had a phone in my room when I was 11 after I pulled it out of a neighbor's trash, fixed it, found an RJ adapter at Radio Shack and wired that in myself. It was an old Western Electric (?) that must have weighed five pounds.

So I guess any kid who can (re)build his or her own computer ought to be able to have one in his or her room.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

It's really no different from TV. If you spend all of your time doing one thing, it's done at the expense of others.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree. Computers couldn't possibly be worse than televison, but for some reason there isn't so much tv bashing these days. At least when using a computer you take a more active roll. Also computers are capable of more things, so even if the kids are using the computer mostly for play, there's a chance that they'll eventually start using them for developing websites or something. Maybe they'll even get really into computers and do it as a living, or just as a hobby. Either way, they're learning, and more importantly, they're learning stuff they're interested in, on their own terms, which is way more effective. Currently the education system is much more rigid in comparison, and maybe this is why kids are scoring low on the white man's tests.

Re:Hrmm

[Bradmont]

correlation does not equal causation

Ahh, but correlation and causation are correlated... therefore correlation must cause causation!

Re:Hrmm

[Guppy06]

"Then part II:"

Sentence fragment.

<SETUP FOR OB SIMPSONS QUOTE/>

Even though it's only a clause, it still needs a verb in there ("Then comes part II," "Then there's part II..."). Your post would not have gone through.

At any rate, your plan wouldn't work simply because nobody would use it. It would be cumbersome and annoying for most users (especially if it's anything like MS Word), and ultimately you'd have nobody to speak your perfect English to.

The only thing I think would work is to try to lead by example rather than trying to criticise everybody else. There will always be lost causes, but others will at least veer away from the number keys after a few responses.

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Can I send you my teenager, too?

Re:Hrmm

[xenocide2]

Oh, I've since fried that poor beast. I now enjoy far too many GBA games while working what could be the highest paying, simplest helpdesk job ever.

Re:Hrmm

[closms]

Yes, I agree with you. The problem is one of granularity. The idea that "Computers lead to poor grades" is way to course grained. The idea needs to be disected further, perhaps playing games or spending all your time in chat rooms leads to poor grades, because then kids aren't doing their homework!

I've always felt that computers are a tool to learning, like books and paper and pencils. If you give a kid a pencil or a book it doesn't mean she will learn anything, they might beat their friends with the book rather then read it. If you give a kid a computer, same thing.

Re:Hrmm

[David Rolfe]

Right, like my sibbling poster said, this really is wrong too. The URI outlines that name:password@host is correct. additionally, if you wanted to be explicit that it was an ssh connection you could merely say:

yo man - ssh://lachlan:abc@123.123.123 kthx bye.

Or whatever you leet youngsters are saying these days.

(See, that follows [protocol:][//[name:password@]host][/resource-path ], using basic notation for neccessary parameters and such.)

Re:Hrmm

[David Rolfe]

I find it more contrived to reach for the 2 key than to just type to. But then again - that's coming from someone who can, you know, type in complete sentences. Not that you don't; I'm not trying to get a flame or something.

To be fair, I can arguably type l8s faster than I can type lates, but only because of the backwards layout of the qwerty keyboard, such that 'ates' is all typed with the left hand, while l8s does split it up between both.

Finally, invoking Perl for terse syntax when it was designed with natural language in mind... please.

Re:Hrmm

[Epidemical]

I agree with you and I'm very much like you; I could ace almost all of my courses if I comitted to doing all my homework and taking notes in class and stuff like that, but I just don't see the point in doing all that easy stuff over and over.

However, I think some would argue that this actually teaches you to function in real life because you can't do interesting stuff all the time. I think I'll be better motivated with a paycheck :)

Re:Hrmm

[sandman935]

Nevermind that they're fries, not chips at all. :)

Re:Hrmm

[Anubis350]

sounds familliar. Thank god for campus jobs in college, I am severely overpaid for the help desk work I do.

Re:Hrmm

[necro2607]

lachlan:abc@123.123.123.123

Re:Hrmm

[GigsVT]

Yeah, that's the problem with kids these days, they give them calculators. Imagine if when the pencil and modern paper came out, they allowed kids to use those! If they had done that, no one would know how to chisel a proper character into stone anymore!

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

p/w abc

what a coincidence, that's the same password i use on my luggage

Re:Hrmm

[Anonymous Coward]

Dat not bes kool. my edumakation dont be that gud cause i's sell crack insted of skool.

Re:Hrmm

[lachlan76]

Well, to me it is a lot more terse than python, bash , basic, etc. Of course, I program in assembly as well as C and perl, so I can see what you mean. Regular expression use makes it seem a lot less verbose.

Also, when I IM, I usually switch from a terminal to X when a message comes in, so my fingers are in the right place.

Re:Hrmm

[Vombatus]

"fish and chip, $5"

Or maybe you only get one chip for your money?

Who knows how many pieces of fish you get though?

Re:Hrmm

[dextroz]

I don't mean accents & dialects as base languages.

It's the things like 'colour' and mutilation to 'color' that's weird because it conveys positive - quite the contrary.

It's all related my friend. Back in the days when the forefathers moved from England to US. They wanted to be safe from domination of British products and mass production units. What we call today as "dumping".

The ingeneous idea was to make everything in the US. So you have door-knobs here that twist the opposite. Taps in the US turn the otherway round to close and open then, the language alphabets were changed and so on. A by-product was the resulting 'artificial' creation of a market segment.

Fast-forward to the future. ClearChannel. What's it doing? buyind radio stations all over the US. Why? To create the general idea that radio in America sucks these days.

Are they aiming this at you? They'd be foolish to think that you with all your moeny to buy whatever you wanted would be subdued by their trash.

Instead, they are targetting your kids. They know in 10 years the 12 years olds of today will 'realize' how trashy radio has 'evolved' - with respect to their generation. In ten years, they are the ones who will be growing up to realize that buying satellite radio is worth it.

Voila, with a little bit of patience you have successfully created for yourself a 'new' market for exploitation.

And that my friend, is the connection to 'breaking' things down to finer grains. just becuase you have ten forms of English, doesn't mean you recognize them all. There was no true concept of American English (or more precisely, "I talk American") 30 years ago.

Oh, and about ClearChannel, they are associated with one of the satellite radio channel. Weird you would think, eh? But no when the bigger picture is presented. If you think it's too far fetched, try looking at the tobacco companies - they plan their market creation and buyer propoganda, right from when the kid is 4 years old. With TV and billboards. Oh whatever... have a great day fellas!

Re:Hrmm

[kwerle]

The problem arises when someone's not astute enough to convey their meaning in clear, grammatically correct form. I've a lot less trouble with with 'BRB' than '1337 5p34k', and less with '1337 5p34k' than with stupid grammatical errors, lazy spelling errors and syntactical miscues because someone is too lazy (or, submit lame excuse here) to have learned how to write a coherent passage.

That is an entirely different problem (IMHO). You're complaining that you're not cool enough to pick up on and parse 1337 5p34k. That is a different category of problem than people writing poorly because it is faster or they learned it from chatrooms. The problem you describe is that others are cooler than you are, and you can't keep up, so they should all slow down. It's only going to get worse as [we] get older.

I spend a lot of time with math and science. I have to be able to express myself to my peers, the public and to students. If I were to lapse into the mindset of the "changing, evolving language" and argue that errors were a form of expression, I'd not, generally, be able to do that. Just as we encourage our engineers to be precise in how they represent their designs and analyses, they have to be able to document what they're doing, or what they've done, or their work won't be usable.

If you're failing to understand 1337 5p34k, you are no longer amoung your peers, you're amoung your betters - that's the point. People don't use 1337 5p34k because they don't know better - they use it because they know better than you.

People write
y r u lol @ me?
because they're lazy - but mostly because computers suck. If computers sucked less, they'd translate that to
Why are you laughing [out loud] at me?
And if they sucked a lot less, we wouldn't be typing, we'd be talking to them and they'd transcribe the text for us.

Re:Hrmm

[MrResistor]

Didn't tutor any freshmen while you were in college, did you?

Most of them can't even multiply by 10s without going for their calculator, because they've been allowed to use calculators in class since 2nd or 3rd grade in some cases. It's pretty hard to learn algebra when you don't really understand arithmatic.

Re:Hrmm

[MrResistor]

Nice job of totally missing my point.

Why don't you reread what I wrote, and then think about how easy it would be to learn calculus if you didn't understand factoring.

Re:Hrmm

[GigsVT]

You totally missed my point. Very few people need to learn calculus because computers can do it. Automatically.

So let a few well paid mathematician/programmers learn it, and the rest of us can just use the programs they wrote.

No other specialized field forces masses of people to learn the field's skills, why is math somehow different? Why do we need 20million people in the US that know calculus?

Re:Hrmm

[MrResistor]

Why do they need to study history? Or literature? Or any of the other myriad topics we've decided they need to learn?

To understand the world around them.

Math is not a specialized field. It's the language that best describes the world we live in. It's also the language of logical thought and problem solving.

Besides, regarding computers doing it automatically: remember GIGO? It's as true today as it was 20 years ago, and the unknowledgable are a lot more likely to suffer the consequences.

Re:Hrmm

[Shikatsu]

Getting people to use it in the first place would likely be very difficult. These people like their poor grammar and annoying shorthand, they're lazy and don't care to reflect on proper usage. The only people that would end up using it are those who already do practice such language skills, not to say that doesn't have it's own merit, a messenger that keeps annoying people away... I'd download it.

Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[jellomizer]

The problem with kids with computers is that they are used both for entertainment and work at the same time. Writing a paper with IM on browsing the internet for sources and to keep tabs your favorite pop star. Sure kids with 24 access to computers they basically give themselves an information overload thus they split there educational learning. While children with more limited access to computers are more forced to get there work done and get off so Mom and Dad, brother and sister can use the computer so they just get the work done especially with a little brat ready to go to mom and Dad that you are using the computer for fun while she needs to use the computer to finish her homework also. It is worse then doing homework with the TV on because they are actively engaged in many activities. As a parent one should make sure the computer enhances ones life but doesn't replace it. When they have to do home work make sure they are doing homework and not on IM or doing an other things that the computer is good at.

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[imsabbel]

I agree.
Normal computer use is like tv-zapping^2.
Take a textbook and read it, or take a sheet of paper to write something, you can concentrate and archive something.
Have your computer with the webbrowser open, then there will be icq popups, new email, winamp in the background, plus the quick game or cool website is only a second away from the boring "need to do" stuff, ready to be changed to at the first opportiunity.
I remember that when i was a kid, i did ZERO useful stuff with the computer, and only learn if i was forced to...

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[bdbolton]

"The problem with kids with computers is that they are used both for entertainment and work at the same time. Writing a paper with IM on browsing the internet for sources and to keep tabs your favorite pop star."

Not just kids. Most adults at work seem unable to focus on work. ESPN, Yahoo... We have a nice long list of sites and ports we block at work to deal with this problem.

My girlfriend always fusses at me because Im never on IM. It's because when Im on a computer, Im working - not chatting. When I want to relax, computers are not exactly where I go. (Present company excluded :)

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[Prof.Phreak]

I totally agree. In fact, I'd even say it's true for adults! When I use the computer, I found that I'm a lot more productive in text mode (linux console) than with a dozen applications open constantly distracting me (and no Mozilla!--the time killer).

It's just you and the code... (and no IM, e-mail, web, etc.)

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[Anonymous Coward]

they split there educational learning

I must say I agree with the +5 Interesting.

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[jesterzog]

I think you're on to a very good point with this, and my feeling is that it applies to more people than just children. I've suspected for a while, at least for myself, that my productivity was a lot more focussed some time ago when I was a DOS user and it was only possible to do one thing at a time.

Windows did away with this somewhat, and now that I use mostly Linux and NetBSD, I frequently have lots of windows open on lots of desktops. Switching to a particular task is easy, but so is switching away from it. It makes it much easier to become distracted. You could be running a terminal application to access a BBS or chat with people, or you could be editing a text file, but not doing both at the same time. If you wanted to run a game, you'd need to save and shut down whatever else you were doing.

In my case, it's probably more a matter of me trying to just train or force myself to work on what I'm supposed to be working on. Still, if I had to stop everything I was doing to check my email, I don't think I'd waste as much time flipping back to my mail client and answering things. If I were a parent, I'd perhaps be wondering if there was a tool out there that might restrict how much another user (such as a child) was allowed to do at any one time.

It might be difficult to develop such a tool in the modern environment, unfortunately. In single user days, many applications were designed with the idea that users might need to stop them and re-start them at short notice. These days, however, more applications are intended to be run in-tandem with other applications, and often to not be stopped very often. eg. Mail programs often invoke web browsers for various types of content, and office suites often require switching between applications.

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[Keith Handy]

While children with more limited access to computers are more forced to get there work done and get off

I don't think they're forced to do that!

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[izomiac]

As one of the multitasking kids (well, sorta, I'm 19) I don't entirely agree. It just depends on the amount of concentration a task requires. Not concentrating on work isn't good even if your aren't doing anything else. If it's some mindless homework, though, it is quite easy to do other things at the same time and still do a good job on it. I regularly respond to message board posts while typing a paper (thanks to e-mail notification), and it doesn't waste much time or decrease the quality of my paper. Of course, I should be studying right now, but I'm on slashdot. That isn't a problem with my multitasking abilities, just my priorities.

Re:Multitasking is harmful for Most kids.

[benow]

Meh, I'll take exception to this. Multitasking can be great. The key is prioritization, keep focused and reduce interruptions, keeping only the worthy balls up in the air. I think it's more of the case of reacting to situations we've never had the chance to experience before. Sure, its new, but learn and grow from the experience. Most people don't have the foggiest idea of multitasking or its benefits, and taking the negative stance simply re-enforces the commonplace.

Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[SIGALRM]

It seems if you overuse computers and trade them for other [types of] teaching, it actually harms the student

Computer technology can help support learning, and that is especially useful in developing the higher-order skills of critical thinking, analysis, and scientific inquiry. But the mere presence of computers in the classroom does not ensure their effective use.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[Umbral Blot]

I bet if kids had to take computer science in elementary school than computers would be shown to be a benefit. However because most elementary scool learning is rote (the stuff a computer is good at) kids rely on the computer for their boring work instead of doing it. I wonder if we took a survey of adults 20 years from now how many of the succesful ones would have grown up with computers. Computers are a large part of our lives, and kids should be exposed to them early.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[morganjharvey]

Computer technology can help support learning, and that is especially useful in developing the higher-order skills of critical thinking, analysis, and scientific inquiry.

Don't forget that having a computer can help your kid with any sort of computer science courses. It seems as if whenever things like this come out, they forget the group of kids, however small, that look at the computer with wonder as something that can be "taken apart" and explored. Yeah, if you let your kids sit on the web and IM their friends while downloading all the crap they can off of kazaa for 7 hours every day, nothing's going to get done. And what about those houses with a TV in every room where the kids are glued to the set? Or remember how video games used to be (still are?) the big evil against homework? What about rock and roll music in the 50s? I think I need to clarify that I'm not disagreeing with you, I'm merely extending your argument.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[Macgrrl]

Computers can help or hurt, it all depends on the teachers.

More importantly, it depends on the Parents.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[Satertek]

I remeber starting out in gwbasic in 3rd grade. Then upgraded to QBasic(!) for 4th and 5th grades. Havn't done any programming at school since until this year (Senior year in HS) in Java. (My CompSci class last year we played cards and maybe 2 tests, and a few days in the computer lab with Pascal)

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[Anonymous Coward]

I have to disagree. Teachers have completely abdicated their responsibility for the fact that the US education system is in deep decline. Think about this. Who sits with a student the most? The parent? Hardly. Students are in school 6-7 hours per day. I know very few parents who are fortunate enough to get to spend that much time with their children. No, computers are the tool of lazy teachers in school. In my day when teachers were hungover they put on films. Now it is time to learn about computers from people who are lucky to know how to turn them on.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[fakeplasticusername]

I think poor academic performance only reflects the irrelavance of the things we require our students to excel in. Spelling in the real word is not a memory test, and no-one is going to ask you what year the magna carta was signed, unless of course you are Ken Jennings. I would be very surprised if the correlation of computer use shows poor student performance in areas of logical understanding like math, science, etc. Whether my child knows the collection of names on the declaration of independence or not, if he is getting A's in math, I'm happy.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[Hatta]

Computer technology can help support learning,

It's important to point out here that academic performance and learning are not the same thing. Especially in americas education where rote memorization is valued more than curiosity and independant though.

If you're intelligent enough to "just get it" after doing 3 or 4 problems out of 40 on an assignment, you're also intelligent enough to question the authority that assigned you those questions, and question the value of getting one letter or another printed on a piece of paper every 9 weeks. Therefore, you're probably not going to go through the tedium and instead satisfy your intellect by writing a program or something. And since you're not doing the work, you're gonna get shitty grades, even though you're smarter and better educated than everyone else in your class.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[Hatta]

Whether my child knows the collection of names on the declaration of independence or not, if he is getting A's in math, I'm happy.

But getting A's in math generally requires doing page after page of problems that are all exactly the same. For the intelligent kid this gets very painful very quick, and he's likely not to do it at all(nor should he have to). So even if your kid isn't getting A's in math, you should still be happy.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[pha777]

Computers not only support learning, computers and internet must completely CHANGE learning.

We need to develop new ways.

We have tons of information available, but teachers still don't know how to manage this in the learning experience.

Besides, the other new thing we have now, is easy and fast publishing tools, so they can create a lot of teaching material.

Of course, it's not so bad, this is going to happen in a the following years.

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[fakeplasticusername]

Right, but in my school, homework counted for 10% of the grade, (and we often had 10pt bonus questions on tests) was yours substantially different?

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[Lurking Zealot]

Computer technology can help support learning, and that is especially useful in developing the higher-order skills of critical thinking, analysis, and scientific inquiry.

Critical thinking, has to be independent of the tool employed. Using computers to teach criticial thinking is likely to interject more distraction into the process. I happen to agree with Clifford Stoll who says that learning is hard, and attempts to make it easier do not really help learning.

I do agree that computers can help support learning, but that potential is realized far less often that we are willing to admit.

For a relatively balanced and sobering analysis, please check out The Flickering Mind by Todd Oppenheimer. Try Oppenheimer's site at Booknoise, or Amazon

I read the Flickering Mind last summer, because I thought I should try something to challenge my assumptions about the value of technology. I (still) believe in the leverage offered by using computers to teach. However, after teaching engineering and numerical analysis for 15 years, I'm beginning to understand the limitations. For years I have been one of the strongest advocates in our department and college for using computer technology in the classroom. Now I try hard to highlight the differences between helpful and unhelpful uses of technology in the practice of engineering.

One of the problems with using technology in a teaching environment is that both students and teachers are easily mesmerized by the eye candy. Somehow we (collectively) have come to believe crappy ideas in a PowerPoint presentation are worth more than good ideas on a blackboard, or delivered with the minimum of distracting graphics.

Back to Oppenheimer ...

In the first half of the book I was annoyed because Oppenheimer seemed to be so ignorant of the technical aspects of computing. I plowed on and began to be swayed. In the end, I'd say that I largely agree: Despite our best intentions, computers are often an impediment to true learning, especially at the elementary and middle school level.

I have an 8 year old son who shows little interest in computers despite plenty of opportunities. He is more interested in building things with everything from Legos to cardboard, tape, wire and sticks. When he was three or so, my wife and I decided that we were never going to limit his access to masking tape, despite our aversion for resource waste. As a result, he and I can now have conversations about how things are made: what holds them together; what kinds of materials are compatible; how you can make something stronger after it breaks. This interest of his is organic, I haven't tried to teach much of it to him. I only try to answer his questions.

One of our favorite joint activities is take apart, where we dismantle unwanted electronic junk like old PCs, injet printers, laserprinters, and FAX machines. For a while I was disappointed over my son's un-interest in computers (he's mostly just unimpressed, except by the graphics in games, which we limit). But now I'm very appreciative of his years of constructing things with tape. In the end I think computers have taught my son the most as cadavers.

LZ

Re:Computers facilitate--not replace--learning

[SIGALRM]

I just have to say, this is one those rare thoughtful posts that spurned further study on my part. *VERY* informative.

Thank you.

i'm one of three kids

[infonick]

and i'm the only one with a computer problem. maybe its because the other two have to share a rather old computer while i have my own powerstation.

Re:i'm one of three kids

[Anonymous Coward]

and the reason for your "powerstation" is for that extra 3 fps in conterstrike... yup figured

Seems logical

[Neil Blender]

Computers make figuring out things too damn easy these days. Back in the day, you had to expend effort to learn things, now it's just googling 'thomas jefferson' or what not to do your reasearch paper.

Re:Seems logical

[teh_mykel]

this isnt entirely true. in a situation like this, who's fault is it that the mentioned student never does work and only googles for it? is it the student's, who has never been taught to actually 'write' their own papers? (instead, shown information and expected to come up with a document based on it.) teachers and even parents share the blame, if any, for the harms of computers.

Re:Seems logical

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, well... yes many students do just 'google it' but isnt the real learning occur when the student comprehends and understands the material?

I look at it this way, it is a tool to find information fast, which gives you more time to analyse, understand, and search for more things pertaining to that subject.

Where the bottom lies is that, how the computer was percieved at the first sight of one. I didnt grow up with the internet. So I only used the word processor just to type, and frankly I didnt use the games that were there, or available in CD's or back then floppies (Shareware DOS). If one sees it as a source of pleasure, other then as a tool to make (for me handwriting and proof-reading) monontonus tasks easier so you can spend more time on the homework, etc,. one just uses the tool just as that. Much like IM is now.

Plus, many parents are beginning to believe that IM is bad and addictive, but then, how is IM different then the Phone was back in the 1980's?

Its still in the perception and use, all of these are tools just like the pen and paper, they can be used for good and bad.

Re:Seems logical

[ScrewMaster]

Yes ... which means that the time has come to raise the bar on education. In essence, powerful data systems are substituting for rote memory to a certain degree. It's time we accept that, and stop wasting a lot of the child's limited time in school with memorization tasks, and start using that time to teach them how to think. Granted, it is important that a student be given a sufficient mental knowledge base in order to use the tools and techniques he is taught, but it is more important to teach a student how to learn, and why, than to stuff his head full facts that he'll never use. Real teaching, where a teacher doesn't just force students to do the minimum, but motivates them to do more, all on their own, is not as common as it should be. And that is because it requires skills, talents and motivation that not all instructors have. To this day, I remember the few teachers I had that managed to really interest me in something, to the point where I read everything the school provided and then went to the library for more. I learned what the school wanted me to learn, and more, because I wanted to. That didn't happen often, but it made all the difference.

Re:Seems logical

[mikael]

Oh yes, I remember those days ... In our Computer Science department, all the most referred to papers were the least accessible. There was only one copy of each paper in the reference section of the library, and students would sabotage each other's attempt to learn (if not the professors attempt to detect plagiarism) by putting them back anywhere but in the section they were supposed to be. Nobody had heard of microfilm let alone online databases. But did that stop attempts by students to knock up a paper quickly? Nope, just copy a couple of paragraphs from each paper to make up the required number of thousands of words.

With information in electronic format, nearly if not all of the above problems can be resolved.

Re:Seems logical

[antifoidulus]

What would be interesting to see if student's doing that type of search are actually getting the background information as well. When I was in elementary school I had to look things up, and I had to at the very least skim a lot of the "irrelevant"(irrelevant in this case meaning irrelevant to the current task at hand) info to get at what was needed for the report. This gave me at least a cursory understanding of how the information mattered in context, which is important for further understanding as well as rention(To this day I am still an American History buff even though I have not studied it in 8 years). The best history teachers are not ones that cram useless info down your throat but get you to think about everything in relation to eachother.
But nowadays all students have to do is google it then use their browsers search function to hone in on certain keywords(or even have the search engine color them) and plop a bunch of sentences down in a paper. The result has a lot of the important facts, but without the context they are meaningless.

Re:Seems logical

[MasterOfMagic]

I have to disagree with you. The last thing that I want a teacher doing is teaching my (yet unborn) children how to think. They should be taught how to reason. There is a big difference. If you teach someone how to think, then you are doing no better than teaching them to repeat what it spouted at them. If you teach them how to reason, you give them a useful toolbox of concepts that they can use to navigate through life and education.

Re:Seems logical

[ScrewMaster]

I'm sorry if I didn't make myself clear, but I think we're just confused about semantics here. I think you're confusing what to think with how to think for yourself which is what I was really trying to say. You're right, though, and I'm not advocating that our teachers instill predetermined patterns of thought and limit our children's ability to reason (much as the Creationists down South are trying to do.) Most people never learn how to think, they simply accept or react without thinking. I meant the term in the same way you did: learn to reason, to think critically, to not accept everything at face value. The point of my post was that we need to focus teaching more on that aspect of the mind, as opposed to simply testing our children's short-term memory by forcing them to cram for tests.

Re:Seems logical

[Anonymous Coward]

So you're implying that you've actually challanged the evolution hypothesis and found it to be true? Or was it just a convenient jab at the right time to prove an otherwise good point at the expense of Creationists?

Re:Seems logical

[Mark of THE CITY]

The cartoon "For Better or For Worse" covered Internet 'research' at the grade school level today.

Thank you, but no

[Dr Tall]

I play about 4 hours of computer games a night (more on weekends of course), and I might very well be my high school's valedictorian next semester. I think those kids weren't playing enough computer games.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Mike Rubits]

4 hours AND valedictorian?

Let me just express my disliking of you, says the 50th percentile :P

Re:Thank you, but no

[sH4RD]

Maybe everyone else is just dumber then you. Where I come from you would be hard pressed to do well with that much gaming late at night.

Re:Thank you, but no

[NeoSkandranon]

You're also smart enough to get your schoolwork done quickly and still have time for that.

The problem pointed out here is when the rest of your classmates put in the same amount of gaming time as you do and their grades suffer for it.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but you suck at Counterstrike.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you either don't have enough extracurricular stuff going on, or your high school doesn't assign nearly enough work. Assuming eight hours of free time after school (3-11 p.m., on the odd assumption that one would want to get reasonable amount of sleep), four hours of gaming only leaves enough time for about three hours of homework or extracurricular activities (assuming it takes you about an hour to eat dinner, which may be an overestimate if you don't have to prepare or clean up yourself). Three hours isn't an insignificant amount of homework, but if your life consists of schoolwork and video games, you owe it to yourself to broaden your horizons.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

Potential valedictorian and still too dumb to understand that there are exceptions to every rule? Frightening.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

and you've never had sex too! what a tripple whammy

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

TJHSST? Nothing more than a (very) poor man's Stuyvesant. You have no bragging rights, buddy.

Re:Thank you, but no

[c00kiemonster]

prob get top of your class , but you will prob get pissed of one day climb a clock tower and start shooting people. PC can be a great learning tool , but not at the expense of social skills ( 4 hrs + of HL2 does not give you social skills ) I also take issue with lack of development in fine motor skills lack of exerise , fitness , climbing trees's ect

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but if he were at TJ, he wouldn't be valedictorian, unless something drastic has changed since I was there. Like class rank for one.

tj, '90.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

BULLSHIT!

unless you are homeschooled, alone, ther eis no way in hell you can play that many video games and still be validectorian. the soon-to-be V at my school is taking 6 AP classes and spends every waking hour studying.

as for the study, i think it does have some truth. my grades suck, but thats only because i dont do homework. im a short-distance person, i dont have a lot of stamina. if we didnt have homework, i would be doing VERY well in school, because the material is easy. its just the stupid work-based point system thats hurting me. i simply cannot spend 11+ hours a day studying. so when i do get home, i get on the computer. but if i didnt, ill just watch tv or sleep or something. the computer is a just a scapegoat.

Re:Thank you, but no

[sH4RD]

Eh, better SAT scores (proof), and a real /. user account to back me up instead of an (anonymous) coward. I think I win.

Re:Thank you, but no

[goon america]

... so none of your courses covered the relevance of sample size in a statistical generalization? You know, maybe you could survey more than one person here...

Re:Thank you, but no

[rhakka]

some people don't have to study to get good grades. I can count the number of times I did homework in K-12 on both hands. I wasn't valedictorian, but that was because on the classes that did have the "homework requirement", I just ate the 10% loss and got an 85 instead of a 95 because I couldn't be bothered to spend that much time doing shit I already knew.

Still got a full scholarship for college too.

Course, I never learned to do homework, so I flunked out my first year. So I would suggest doing homework just for the practice of self discipline to others, not necessarily for its educational value. Or if you aren't going to do homework, spend X amount of your free time learning SOMETHING instead of fucking off.

Re:Thank you, but no

[double-oh three]

It's easy to have high SAT scores when you don't let the less intelligent into your school. You don't win, you get disqualified for cheating.

Re:Thank you, but no

[jellomizer]

Well people tend to learn information in different methods, Some are audio learners who learn all the information from the lectures, others learn visually so after they read the book it sticks, others learn by doing they actually need to do examples and experience the problems, and most people are some other combination. I myself am an almost an equal combination of all 3 which is helpful in a way by the fact that I can get something from any method of teaching but for me to truly learn everything I need to do all of it, so when I was in school I needed to do homework even if it wasn't graded because if I didn't do it I wouldn't learn the information fully. You are probably a stronger visual, audio learner so you can easily finish your homework because you have a clear memory of the lecture or from the reading. Thus having time to play video games. Other and most other kids need more of a combination of learning and the computer games interferes with there learning process.

So you can pat yourself on your back and say how smart you are. For next year when you say that you were a valedictorian in your college they will just look at you and gracefully smile thinking to themselves whoodedoo! After you get you first job after college your GPA in college will likewise increasingly diminished. What does stick is the information that you actually learned in school, more importantly the connections you made yourself and less the grades you earned in the past.

Re:Thank you, but no

[sH4RD]

This is getting way offtopic, but last time I checked Stuyvesant didn't let the less intelligent in either... If you mean a larger class size, NYC is a lot bigger than Fairfax County, Virginia, so it's kinda a trade-off. Or maybe I am missing your point.

Re:Thank you, but no

[swimin]

How do fit that all in? Im about 10th in my class right now, and Im still only getting in around 3 hours a day of gaming.

Re:Thank you, but no

[double-oh three]

I'm saying that a school's average test scores are useless when you restrict the type of kids who get in to those who do well on tests. I'm currently in a neighboring school(Washington-Lee) that has mediocre test scores... until you realize that over a third of the student body uses the free lunch program and is more heavily diverse than most of the schools in northern VA.

So yes, it's good that test scores are high, but that doesn't mean it's a good school.

Re:Thank you, but no

[TravisWatkins]

Damn, at my school homework counted for 60% of your grade. I finished what I could in class to get passing grades but usually ended up right around 50% because of not wanting to do stupid shit I already knew. Managed to slip by though, just barely.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

I didn't quite make veledictorian, and I didn't play that many video games, but I finished in the top 10 of my class (of 500), with 5AP classes senior year, and I didn't do squat. Of course, I think ultimately that worked against me. It'd be better if I'd had to work and learned a bit more discipline, but I certainly don't find his story hard to believe.

Re:Thank you, but no

[rhakka]

nice sig, great album, btw.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, but unlike you he can spell properly, use apostrophes correctly, and form grammatical sentences.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

A friend of mine was Valedictorian in High School.

She was one of two applicants to do that, so I wouldn't say it proved much...

Re:Thank you, but no

[Dr Tall]

I feel like I know you...

Re:Thank you, but no

[Dr Tall]

Isn't there some saying about not having to outrun the bear?

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but what aim he'll have...

Re:Thank you, but no

[Dr Tall]

How am I going to climb the clock tower if I can't climb a tree?

Re:Thank you, but no

[gavinjolly]

Me too. At University I failed my first year due to poor study techniques. Passed the next 4 years to get my Engineering Degree. In school, 3rd form (13 years old) I got an entire report for 6 subjects with A for achievement and E for effort. If I had studied at school I would have not failed my first year at Univeristy.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Dr Tall]

You are probably a stronger visual, audio learner so you can easily finish your homework because you have a clear memory of the lecture or from the reading.

Sounds like you've done some research on learning. You're right about my learning style anyway.

For next year when you say that you were a valedictorian in your college they will just look at you and gracefully smile thinking to themselves whoodedoo!

Oh, yes, I am fully aware that not a soul at my college is going to care about my previous class rank. Just like no one is going to care what my college class rank will be. It's a temporary spotlight, like any other.

After you get you first job after college your GPA in college will likewise increasingly diminished.

Yes, I am fortunate that I can work during the summer and take time off during the school year. College is going to be more difficult in that respect!

Re:Thank you, but no

[flynt]

What school were you awarded a scholarship to? You can't just specify that you went to a university without the school being named.

Re:Thank you, but no

[GuineaPigMan]

I have a similar case here... I'm only in 10th grade, yet I'm almost definately in the top 10, if not in the top 5 of my class of a few hundred (last quarter's average was a 97 I believe.) And get this, I have 4 computers... personally. My family also has one and there's an old 233Mhz hanging around somewhere which my younger brother used to use. I have an IBM laptop - (the "work" computer), a 566Mhz Dell Dimension, an SGI O2 (got it off of eBay,) and a computer that I built myself this past summer with an Athlon 64 3500+. I'm not too much of a gamer, but I spend a large deal of time on my computers, be it tinkering with them or looking at the new headlines on Slashdot. If there's exceptions to the rule, then it's not much of a rule, and trend will probably be that one way or another, the rule will be broken down at the point at which it's exceptions outweigh it's value of correctness.

Re:Thank you, but no

[rhakka]

I can't? I can't see how that's any of your business. If you think I'm lying for some reason, feel free to think that.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

No, I definitely believe you. I was just wondering how good of university you got into while not studying in high school.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Cabriel]

some people don't have to study to get good grades. I can count the number of times I did homework in K-12 on both hands. I wasn't valedictorian, but that was because on the classes that did have the "homework requirement", I just ate the 10% loss and got an 85 instead of a 95 because I couldn't be bothered to spend that much time doing shit I already knew.

Still got a full scholarship for college too.

I did this too, right up to the scholarship. However, there was this one physics class where the homework was worth 40% of the final grade... I ate the 40% loss and got a 48 instead of 88. Well, next semester, I switched an optional class out so I could retake physics. Best thing I ever did with my grade 11 year; I brought my mark up to 84 with more (but not all) of the homework done.

However, this is an example. Not all classes score homework at 10%. There is a very good point to homework more than ingraining the knowledge. It also helps us learn to focus on work, even if we don't enjoy doing it, which is valuable in the job market.

Re:Thank you, but no

[rice_web]

I basically spend the time that I am not working or at school studying. I read Forbes Fast Company, Discover, classic literature, guides to foreign languages, programming manuals, history books, law books, and anything of interest on SlashDot (yes, I do read articles!).

Yet, I could not pull of more than a 3.0 GPA in high school, despite what I believed was a 95% test average. And now college has rolled around, and I am failing two classes (though I'm easily the teachers' pet, as they are all magnificently puzzled by my habits). I can't stand to do homework, and refuse to do it; it would be wasting time, and that I won't do. I never received my scholarship. And I went to a crappy university, too.

If I had it in me to do homework, I would, and I would recommend no matter the struggle that everyone try the same. I do not regret not doing homework, for in fact I have learned so many things in the time that I have not done homework. However, I have been greatly disadvantaged by not following the pack and turning in the occasional essay.

Re:Thank you, but no

[rhakka]

I had decent grades in high level courses, good recommendations, varied extracuriculars and good SATs.

A serious (but not famous) engineering school looking to increase their in-country diversity gave me and a few other students with pretty much the same profile scholarships. We all flunked out first year for the same reasons too, so I bet they revised their formula after that. It's the kind of engineering school where a third of the students are local, a half are foreign (not sure how they marketed that, but many classmates were indian, russian, or vietnamese), and the rest were american kids like me... dunno how many others were by virtue of scholarship of course, but I don't think it was all of them ;)

It was a great engineering program though, definitely, from what I could tell by when I actually went to class. Some really sharp, motivated people doing cool stuff there too. But definitely not Ivy league or any other such high profile institution.

Re:Thank you, but no

[rhakka]

For me it took years before I was ready and really motivated enough by something to pay my dues and do what I needed to do to get ahead. These days my homework is 24/7 furthering my ability in my chosen field, with short breaks to make sure I still have a life too. But I want to do it now, it excites me and it's self directed, which removes the "jumping through hoops" sensation I had.

One thing I did find useful taking classes after I flunked out was taking night classes. The students are more excited to be there, the professor responds to it, taking just a couple classes at a time makes homework less of a chore, and you can really dig in and learn. At least, that's what I found. Results may vary ;)

Re:Thank you, but no

[rhakka]

it's invaluable for a lot of things, being able to do what you need to do even if you aren't "in the mood".

What would be best though, I think, is look for students like you and I, and give them something they have to work for in high school. These days I can sit down and work 14 hours, but it's because I'm interested in and love what I'm doing. Perhaps if in high school homework was more than simple repitition of things I already knew, it would have been much easier to develope those work habits.

or maybe not, who knows? Maybe I was just lazy, and lucky.

Re:Thank you, but no

[omicronish]

some people don't have to study to get good grades

At the same time I hope readers of this comment will also realize that some people do have to study and do homework for good grades and to learn. Sometimes people seem to observe others doing well academically without any apparent work and see that as an excuse for slacking off.

The parent poster can do well in school without homework. Cool! I can't, and I realize that. Don't make the mistake of believing otherwise if you're like me.

Re:Thank you, but no

[rhakka]

I always had the utmost respect for my friends that were working their asses off to get the grades, and it was obvious that their problem wasn't that they weren't intelligent.

Different modes for different folks, that's all. Being aware of yourself, as you are pointing out, is the most important thing.

Re:Thank you, but no

[Anonymous Coward]

Drexel would be my guess.

Re:Thank you, but no

[EastCoastSurfer]

I had your same problem. I got A's and B's in high school and rarely did any homework at home and never studied. What I usually did was do the next days homework during the current class.

In math courses for example, the the teacher would take an hour explaining a simple match concept that should only take someone 5 minutes to get. I would just use this time to do the next days homework.

In Lit classes I could listen to class dicussions about books and make out enough of the plot to BS my way to a B.

This was all fine and good until I hit college. I struggled the first year until I learned how to study. It sucked because even though I had nearly a 4.0 my last 2 years (while taking all my 'hard' degree classes), I still only ended up with an overall GPA of 3.2.

i work from home

[Anonymous Coward]

when i moved house and didn't have internet access for a couple of weeks i got a lot more done (no slashdot for one!)

sure the correlation isn't between those with internet access and those without?

Re:i work from home

[theblacksun]

I'm effectively an internet junkie. It is very easy to slip off whatever project I'm working on for a second and check to see if any one of those news post sites I check have updated. Well something cool gets posted and I fall further off. I start reading the message board about it and I find a few more links. It takes discipline to stay on task when you have so much shit more interesting than whatever BS you should be doing exactly one click away (My coveted firefox homepage)

(An oh yea, this is IE's)

Re:i work from home

[danila]

Recently I had my PC broken (I stupidly uninstalled LBA-48 support and then wondered about disk corruption), so instead of reading /. I travelled for 5 days to another country, read several books books, read proceedings from a conference on technology foresight I was interested in, read a few more books, discovered for myself how great reading paper books in an armchair for 8 hours straight and finishing a book in one go actually is (I managed to forgot that in recent years), visited two museums and generally had a nice enjoyable life.

Sadly, the computer was fixed. Now I am playing Half-Life 2 and posting to Slashdot like a decadent degenerate. :( Meanwhile I am supposed to be writing a business plan and preparing a presentation for tomorrow's conference. Not to mention finishing my Ph.D. It's pathetic. My next computer won't have a Net connection or a 3D videocard...

It's a multi-use system.

[IvyMike]

Stolen from some comedian: "The same machine that teaches my kids the alphabet also brings me porn."

"Computer use" does not really describe the activity with any amount of precision.

Re:It's a multi-use system.

[MurphyZero]

It was one of the Blue Collar Comedy guys, either Foxworthy or Engvall, I think Engvall.

Re:It's a multi-use system.

[forkazoo]

Likewise, book use can "Sexy Yvette's quest for true love" or "A practical guide to nuclear engineering." TV use can be "Fear Factor," or "Nova." This is a complete non-article. It could be improved by clarifying to the point of, "Non academic activities don't help in school."

Me

[evilmuffins]

Funny, I have not one, but 3 computers in my room, and some how I've managed to keep around a 3.5 in highschool for the last 2 years.

Re:Me

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry man, but high school level of teaching does not require much attention. Try to keep your 3.5 in third of University (and try going into something like Math or Physics :P

Re:Me

[imsabbel]

Is a 3.5 in highschool good or bad?
(is this a grade, or a comparative place in a list, ect)?

Re:Me

[magefile]

It's a "GPA" (gradepoint average). Calibrations vary, but often it's A+=4.0, B=3.0, C=2.0, D=1.0, F=0.0. So a 3.5 is about a low A or high B. Pretty good, better than average, perhaps.

Re:Me

[imsabbel]

ah, thx. , forgot that in america, grades are letters. If you get number grades, you do arithmethic mean automatically, no need for a fancy term :)

Re:Me

[Anonymous Coward]

That really isn't a good argument. I've have a 3.9 so far at University. I have three computers as well. This semester was the first semester I really began putting computers before my studies and I feel my GPA will suffer. Of course, the decline may be due in part to my increase in alcohol consumption. That, however, is neither here nor there. I don't blame computers entirely, but they are a stimulus that isn't faultless. If the computers weren't there, I would probably study. I can't help but give a little blame to my desktop for being so damn SEXY!

Re:Me

[aldoman]

I'd also love to know. In the UK you either have a % or a grade (U, G, F, E, D, C, B, A, A*) for 'high school'. Please explain this mystery decimal point system.

Re:Me

[moosesocks]

note that many schools scale this based upon the difficulty of the course. Eg, an A+ in an honors course will often equate to a 5.0, or will simply be weighted more heavily than an easier course.

However, my school grades on a 4.3 scale where 4.3 is an a+, 4.0 is an a, etc...

A 3.5 would be about the top quarter in my school.

Re:Me

[malfunct]

This may, or may not be a good grade. With all the effort to make people "feel good" lately I wonder if what used to be a high grade now is just sort of average.

Re:Me

[magefile]

That's why I said "calibrations vary". Plus, I figured I'd keep it simple. Besides, as far as applying to colleges ... they'll often re-calculate your GPA from your raw grades to get rid of the weightings.

Makes some sense

[div_2n]

*ducks*

Let's be honest. How many of us sit down to "just check e-mail" and find that nearly an hour has passed without really doing anything productive?

If usage goes up but productive usage doesn't go up, then time is wasted.

Re:Makes some sense

[Doctor Crumb]

You just described my work day.

Re:Makes some sense

[IO ERROR]

I sat down two hours ago to just check email, and now here I am posting to /. I still haven't gotten around to checking email. I think I just wasted two hours.

Re:Makes some sense

[Rie Beam]

"Let's be honest. How many of us sit down to "just check e-mail" and find that nearly an hour has passed without really doing anything productive?"

Oh shit, I'm supposed to be writing a paper. BRB.

Re:Makes some sense

[twitter]

Let's be honest. How many of us sit down to "just check e-mail" and find that nearly an hour has passed without really doing anything productive?

If you are a student learning composition, the time was productive. What's wasted time for you, may not be wasted time for others. I know that my Slashdotting has kept up my writing skills and vocabulary from results on standardized tests such as the GRE where I consistently perform well. As the article points out, email was a bright spot for academic achievement:

Academic performance rose among those who routinely engaged in writing e-mail or running educational software.

The kind of person who bothers to compose an email might also be the type of person who bothers to study harder anyway, but your general premise is a projection rather than a reasonable thought.

*ducks*

Where? I'm hungry and it's been a while since I've had some good game bird.

Re:Makes some sense

[trabisnikof]

Only an hour, wow you don't get a lot of email.

Re:Makes some sense

[Anonymous Coward]

I do it, but when I wasn't I was watching tv with the same time. At least with the computer I do stuff semi-useful and it keeps me from eating out of sheer boredom.

Obvious Correlation

[eeg3]

Just look at the performance of the average student in math without a calculator. People just don't know how to do the math, and don't feel the need anymore.

Computers have become a crutch and a hindrance rather than a tool. Pretty sad.

Re:Obvious Correlation

[Morphix84]

Maybe, but look at the kind of math that gets taught in schools now. Maybe back in the day students were flexing their brains with the crazy arithmetic skill they had, but you probably weren't doing 40 terms of a Fourier series either. Just because we're slower to multiply 3 digit numbers in our head than students of yesteryear doesn't mean we're crippled.

Re:Obvious Correlation

[Anonymous Coward]

What you mean is adding numbers, not math. If we are talking serious math, no calculator can help you in any way.

Re:Obvious Correlation

[bluGill]

I cannot recall the last time I did math. I'm pretty sure when I did I just pulled up the calculator on my computer, because it was there. This would have been several months ago though, face it, basic arithmetic is a useful skill that you need to know how to do with paper an pencil, but you don't really use. Knowing arithmetic is required for several more advanced courses, but isn't useful in itself. Those courses are often more useful in teaching you to think through hard abstract problems for that matter.

My best guess as to the last time I did math I was doing arithmetic in both hex and decimal. I'm not sure what 0x45f + 36 is, but I've often needed numbers like that.

Re:Obvious Correlation

[myowntrueself]

"People just don't know how to do the math, and don't feel the need anymore."

People just don't know how program by manually loading up the machine code, and don't feel the need anymore.

I don't feel that routinely running arithmetic algorithms helps with using math any more than routinely writing machine code helps with using computers.

My arithmetic is absolutely *shocking* but I find math fascinating.

So I did formal logic instead. Much easier; only two numbers. I get dizzy trying to do long division in base 10 though.

;)

But I agree in another sense; computers are too often 'en-lame-ing' rather than 'en-able-ing'.

Re:Obvious Correlation

[ReddyRd5]

I did math this morning - I balanced my checkbook - I know that is basic math which is something everyone needs to be able to do before writing out the bills or shopping

Re:Obvious Correlation

[Anonymous Coward]

What? You balanced the checkbook? You must not be an American....

Re:Obvious Correlation

[ReddyRd5]

I'm a Texan - I'm also a female that loves math.

Well, yea...

[Duncan3]

Learning and multitasking have never mixed well.

Multitasking also doesnt mix well with research, creativity, or anything really worth doing well for that matter.

Re:Well, yea...

[teh_mykel]

then is it really multitasking? really, the human brain's multitasking abilities are pathetic. we need more Linux-powered brain multitasking research..

Re:Well, yea...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. If I'm all on fire with some computer project, there's nothing like having a 3x3 X susbcreen division with information and tools all over the place. If I don't give a fuck I could distract myself even on DOS 6.0.

We're all running around putting ourselves through slavery these days because we are just supposed to be "motivated" and "productive". Well fuck that. If I have a motive, motivation is just there, no self-hypnosis needed. Then productivity is only influenced by what tools and options I have available + if I'm rested and well-nourished. Anybody distracts me? Too bad for them - they'll feel unloved.

The problem these days is that we're mostly just products of that damned TV and have barely the awareness to speak in complete sentences. That holds for myself, too, a lot of the time. Most Western males run around as half-losers and would never bother getting a job or a degree if it weren't for the social stigma of being called for the slacker one is inside.

My two Eurocents.

Re:Well, yea...

[Anonymous Coward]

What a stupid concept. Multi-tasking is an essential skill. Unless you are discussing a CPU, any time you are involved in more than one activity that recquires effort and ability you are Multi-tasking. What you mean to say is that anything worth doing is worth focusing on. Multi-tasking could be walking and blowing bubbles in chewing gum, but it is also what you are doing when you compose an essay in your mind while typing. You don't think we need to finish our mental paper and then attend to the typing, do you? Or is composition not worth doing well?

Computer's fault?

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder how much of that "frequent computer use" is spent on entertainment instead of educational software?

For instance, I used computers a lot when I was younger, but it was playing around with Logo and Basic on an Apple 2. I turned out to be a pretty good student.

Re:Computer's fault?

[dgagley]

Part of the learning problem is interaction with other LIVE PEOPLE. There also has been a case where hadwriting suffers along with spelling. I have an eight year old and a four year old and the teachers do like to use computers but when it comes to math and language they are told to do it by hand. It is the early years where the computer can hinder some of the ineraction and learning.

My kids only have learning software on the computer and it does help. The entertainment comes from the PS2 and XBox which they can use on a limited basis.

HOW CAN THEY HURT LEARNING!

[Anonymous Coward]

I am currently studying the mating habits of the opposite sex here

http://members.cox.net/tom_fuller/indx.htm

Unsupported Conclusions

[xercist]

How exactly do you get from "found a correlation between frequent computer usage and poor academic performance" to "Too Many Computers Hurt Learning"?

Re:Unsupported Conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

I was wondering that too... specifically how to get from "academic performance" to "learning". The two are quite unrelated.

Re:Unsupported Conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

How exactly do you get from "found a correlation between frequent computer usage and poor academic performance" to "Too Many Computers Hurt Learning"?

I used a computer.

Re:Unsupported Conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the conclusion is well supported. The study measured the rate of academic impact and compared it to the amount of computer usage.

I believe the comment about the number of computers in the home is a vague reference to computers in the child's room. A computer in the school properly used can have some benefit in some ways but when you add a second computer at home and then a third again at home there is an increasing negative impact.

This was a very large study multinational study. It deserves careful attention. It seems many of the slashdot comments are echoing the sentiment of the study from personal experience.

Re:Unsupported Conclusions

[thetroll123]

Indeed. The story itself is of some value, but the headline is a truism. Too much of anything is harmful - that's what "too much" means.

Re:Unsupported Conclusions

[Anonymous Coward]

I know it's OT to reply to sigs, but what the hell:

At the rate of 1-grep-of-7-characters/second it would take 72,057,594,037,927,936 seconds or 2,284,931,317 years to find any particular 7 character combination :)

Re:Unsupported Conclusions

[TRACK-YOUR-POSITION]

From a sample of 175,000 15-year-old students in 31 countries, researchers at the University of Munich announced in November that performance in math and reading had suffered significantly among students who have more than one computer at home.

So, owning more than one computer, when controlled for income level, correllates with decreased academic performance. Unless you want to just use the complete text of study as the headline, "Too Many Computers Hurt Learning" is just fine.

In any event, it's surely less objectionable than the CSM's hed: "Computers are a drag on learning".

Sounds more like a case of parental apathy

[Doomstalk]

It's like TV. If you let your kids watch TV all night rather than doing their homework or studying, they're going to do very poorly in school even if they've been watching PBS or The Learning Channel. More TVs makes it easier for them to go unmonitored and unchecked. In the same sense, if you don't monitor how much your kids use the net, you're going to have academic problems. And, much like having more than one TV, multiple computers means that kids can more easily spend all night surfing the web and talking to their friends (especially if they've got a box in their room). In both cases, parents who take an interest in their kids' activities will have less of a problem.

Re:Sounds more like a case of parental apathy

[Rirath.com]

Thank you, some common sense.
You are correct, end of thread.

"how do you deal with your kids' computer use?"

I don't have kids, but if I did I wouldn't take my educational advice from The Christian Science Monitor, for one.

Re:Sounds more like a case of parental apathy

[Reziac]

I misread your subject as "parental atrophy", but it amounts to the same thing -- letting something else do the parenting, because it's easier.

Re:Sounds more like a case of parental apathy

[Doomstalk]

don't have kids, but if I did I wouldn't take my educational advice from The Christian Science Monitor, for one.

Don't knock The Christian Science Monitor. They're actually a reputable organization, not the conservative reactionaries their name makes them out to be.

Speaking Of That

[Rie Beam]

The kid who spends his time reading "Monster Truck Mash-azine" does poorer than the kid who reads "Scientific American". Therefore, magazines are bad for all children.

Re:Speaking Of That

[Anonymous Coward]

The kid is reading instead of watching TV. I'd say that the kid reading the monster truck magazine still does better than the kid just watching monster trucks on TV, unless all he's doing is looking at the pictures in the magazine anyway.

simple

[pbjones]

Time for schoolwork
time for outside play
time for computer, or TV

They must do their school work or no play or computer. They must spend time outside or with other kids, eg sport. or no computer time.
when everthing else is done they can use the computer as much as they like. Dont fall into the 'I need a computer for school' and then not check it use, they will screw you if they can!

Re:simple

[clumsy yakman]

I wholeheartedly agree with the play outside a bit, play with the computer a bit theory of parenting. I have a 6 year old who has grown up using the computer mostly to play learning games and the occassional Tonka Joe "smash the poor keyboard to bits game" and of course some hotwheels game.
My wife and I have constantly made him and his 4 year old sister "play" on their leap-pads and "play" on the computer INSTEAD of sitting in front of the ShIn3Y Babysitt3r!! The results being this quote from his kindergarten teacher," He's the best reader in class." He's currently reading second grade books & his sissy isn't too far behind.

Just like guns... it's not the guns that kill people, it's the people that kill people. Computers aren't making kids stupid, it's stupid parents not supervising computer use properly.

I especially enjoyed the "they will screw you if they can" comment. >:)

Leverage your tools

[Umbral Blot]

But isn't that a good thing. AS we progress humans should have to memorize less things and use our tools to do more. That is the trend in history after all. I don't think that we should cripple ourselves just because that is how things used to be done. Kids nowadays need to learn how to evaluate sources and find information more than they need to memorize it.

Re:Leverage your tools

[Titusdot Groan]

Hmmm, but the most powerful ability is the ability to recall that information exists and where to find it.

Memorize less but recall more if you get my drift.

The problem is that unless you know what options are out there you don't look for them.

Re:Leverage your tools

[0racle]

Then shouldn't googling for it increase the time spent learning since you no longer have to manually go through books upon books to find what you were looking for? No retention of what you read is hardly googles fault, you would have forgotten what you read in a book as well.

Computers are just objects they don't make someone fail courses, so don't blame it. You want someone to blame, blame the compete lack of parenting shown all too often, or blame the students lack of self control, this is just more people looking to lay blame elsewhere and say, "look its not my fault."

Re:Leverage your tools

[bwy]

AS we progress humans should have to memorize less things and use our tools to do more.

Agreed. Whis is why I friggin HATE technical interviews. I have 7 years of experience coding Java, and some guy on the other side of the desk asks me how many methods the serializable interface has. That was an actual question. Maybe, just maybe, I've spent MORE time learning concepts and how to build effective applications that users actually need, and LESS time memorizing javadoc that is only a click away from any PC in the country. And you wonder why big IT departments are disfunctional. Because they hire 80K walking javadoc repositories to develop apps.

Re:Leverage your tools

[Anonymous Coward]

When did leverage become a verb? Try "use". Plain, precise speech is a sign of intelligence, actually.

Re:Leverage your tools

[gnovos]

How many methods does the serializable interface have?

Correct response: Not a clue, but do you know how to use PhantomReferences and a judicious use of the reflection api to build an auto-reclaiming object pool? No? Then let's move on to the questions that will actually determine my fitness for this position, shall we?

Re:Leverage your tools

[gnovos]

When did leverage become a verb? Try "use". Plain, precise speech is a sign of intelligence, actually.

So by leveraging the word "use" we actually sound more intelligent? Is that what you are trying to dialog to me?

Re:Leverage your tools

[Anonymous Coward]

In American, there is no noun that cannot be verbed.

Re:Leverage your tools

[maxwell demon]

When did leverage become a verb?

There is no noun that cannot be verbed! :-)

Re:Leverage your tools

[henni16]

I also think that API-questions like "is the method called getSessionId() or getSessionID()" are totally stupid and since I'm using an IDE with auto completion of method names would be somewhat hard to answer for me, too;
but to be fair to your interviewer:
the question about methods in Serializable isn't that stupid, because Serializable is well known for having no methods at all, being the prime example for a pure marker interface.
Maybe a better question would have been:
"..and do you know why most of the awt/swing classes don't implement Serializable, although this Interface does not contain any methods?"
or:
"do you know why your Session values should implement Serializable, although this Interface does not contain any methods?"

I'm not surprised

[blisspix]

I do not believe that one needs to use a computer for school until you are in high school. It is a waste of time for teachers to have computers in classrooms before this time. It is only taking away from other, more critical skills like reading which have been on a downward spiral in recent years.

I think I benefited from an era when computers were simpler. I had an Amstrad at home. I could use a word processor that wasn't much more complex than a typewriter, play Brick and other very basic games. Drawing was similar to MS Paint. Kids these days are overwhelmed by extremely complex tools and so spend way too much time even learning the basics.

Re:I'm not surprised

[quizteamer]

Although I agree that kids should have to learn how to do important things, like written papers and math, without a computer, computers should be introduced before high school. But instead of using it to do papers or math, kids should be taught BASIC or some other simple programing language. Learning simple logic early in life will help them out later on.

Re:I'm not surprised

[sageFool]

Well, I started programming in 2nd grade after breaking my arm playing football. Only could do it because there was a computer in the classroom. I also read very quickly and accurately.

I would presume that w/ more computers in the home kids have better access to computers to play games with minimal oversight by the parents. Which is a massive timesink and way to blow your grades. In a slightly unrelated note I knew several people who dropped out of college playing muds. Parent responsibly!

This explains it!

[bluethundr]

The entire phenomenon of trolling! SOLVE!

Kids?

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be mistaking me for someone who has a life :)

Mod troll -99 funny +1

Well

[theblacksun]

I hope they're not just giving kids a computer and telling them to go learn this topic or that topic. You need focused software to focus their minds if you expect satisfactory educational results.

An as aside, has anyone ever seen educational software packages? I've seen the kind they show education majors at the top education college in the state; It is absolutely aweful. The interfaces are so poor they make you wince.

maybe the conclusion is flawed

[biryokumaru]

is the correlation based on grade performance (article doesnt seem to say)? being just out of high school, i noticed that geeky computer guys are super-smart, but get bad grades cuz they just dont give a **** about menial tasks like homework (maybe a realization that most menial tasks would be better done by a computer). also, intelligent teenagers who spend much time on computers tend to care little about the superficial aspects of things, such as formatting and making cardboard displays really pretty, which are both a major part of doing well in high school.

i note some objectivity here (if not much) as i was not one of the geeky computer guys (i am now).

Re:maybe the conclusion is flawed

[xenocide2]

Its hard to take seriously the enlighenment of a professed non geek who no longer cares about formatting, and quickly derides the cardboard displays they must have spent so much time on.

As a self professed computer geek in high school, I can avouch that my compatroits were indeed slackers. It was almost a contest; who could get the most for the least. Which was probably for the best, because if we had been competing to have the highest percentage, we would probably have destroyed ourselves. I was enrolled in like 32 credit hours in high school, but that's stretched out over two semester, so its really closer to 16 credit hours of learning a semester and a hell of a lot more work. College was so much more relaxed, and I truly appreciated that. I wound up getting more B's than A's though, which certainly hasnt helped me in the job finding process this year.

At some point, you need to realize that the path you're on is your own choice, and that you should take pride in your work, even the formatting and cardboard displays.

Re:maybe the conclusion is flawed

[zx75]

I don't think that divides it down far enough. Just being geeky/intelligent and not caring or caring little about details doesn't necessarily a bad student make. In my high school I was one of the geeky computer guys, and although I didn't care about the boring crap that I had to go through in class, it came easily enough to me and I was aware enough about the impact on the future that I was right near the top of my class (not #1, but in the top 10 or so of about 300 students).

However, I have a friend who was in the exact same situation as I, except he didn't bother in the slightest with school work and didn't do nearly as well as I did in class. We went to different universities studying the same sort of things, I'm doing reasonably well, enough so that I'm happy with what I've accomplished and will graduate in a few months. He on the otherhand finally discovered something challanging that he enjoyed, and he's now working on his Masters degree.

To close

[Anonymous Coward]

Crap, I just got grounded from my computers (beowolf cluster too) for getting a 70 on my science test. Might I add that I take my science via an online classroom (one of the many good things that come from home schooling)

I guess the ability to do all my school in front of a broadband connection doesn't help anything...

Oh Parents

[Morphix84]

*sighs* Oh Parents. He's an idea. Stop worrying about the evils of Television and Computers et. al. Stop Lobbying the FCC to censor all broadcast media. Do some parenting. Sign your kids up for swimming lessons or something, expose them to a variety of things so they can learn what they enjoy, but if they get their work done, if computers are what they enjoy, regardless of what they're using them for. LET THEM USE THE BLOODY COMPUTER.

Re:Oh Parents

[ob0101011101]

Don't be so patronising, you obviously don't have any children.

It's _not_ easy raising kids. For starters the little buggers know exactly how to manipulate you into getting what they want. If you stick to your guns and don't give in you're the Worst Dad In The World [TM].

You seem to be advocating a "let them do as they wish approach". It doesn't work. My 4yo would watch DVDs all day, eat yoghurt (or ice cream) for dinner at 10pm every night, not go outside, and spend the rest of his time playing MAME games and crusing the ABC Kids web-site. He also refuses to go swimming, 'cause the swimming teacher (who also knew best) kept dunking him to get him 'used' to being underwater. He saw straight throught those 'accidents'.

Every kid is different, there's no book or person who can tell you what or how to manage you kids. Some of them really need it (my 4yo does), yet the
6yo (girl) is self motivating and self regulating, always has been.

No-one has the answers, because there aren't any. That said, having kids is still the most fun and rewarding thing you can ever do.

Re:Oh Parents

[Anonymous Coward]

He also refuses to go swimming, 'cause the swimming teacher (who also knew best) kept dunking him to get him 'used' to being underwater. He saw straight throught those 'accidents'.

What? That's a certain way to make a kid afraid of water. You should have found a different swimming teacher immidiately. I just hope he won't be afraid of water for the rest of his life (I have been since I was around four, and I have been working hard to get over it for the last three years (I'm 28 now), and I am finally seeing some progress. It'll be at least a couple of years more before I get completely over it, if ever.

Yeah....it's a known dissease called

[Anonymous Coward]

slashdot

Nature of computer usage changed.

[jellomizer]

Back the the Apple II/ IBM DOS area. When you used a computer you used 1 program at a time. You used a word processor you were usually in the word processor until you were done. If you were in Lotus 123 you were in Lotus 123 until you were done. Multitasking was near unheard of. So when you used you Word Perfect you were doing your work. Now with multitasking and windowing environment kids can now have there paper open while chatting with there friends. Playing some game in yahoo.com checking up there favorite pop star. Most kids don't naturally have a since of focus if they have the chance they will do other things that are more enjoyable then homework. They will do there work to avoid being yelled at by there parents/teachers but not for the point of learning the information, so with modern computers they can get the work done without learning the information because there mind is split on many tasks.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Chuck Chunder]

checking up there favorite pop star

Two computers in your household, right? ;)

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

correct English and correct spelling was also deficient in most schools

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's "their", dumbass.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

haha, too bad the fucking moderators have no sense of humour.

trollburger

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[jellomizer]

You do realize that some people are cursed with writing problems. I normally get "their" and "there" wright but sometimes I slip, I still after 27 years need to be conscious on what I am writing.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[caino59]

you also missed 'since' of focus

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[ErikTheRed]

No multitasking under DOS?!?? Desqview, baby, Desqview! Ahh... those were the days (and I miss the properly used SysRq key).

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[conradp]

You do realize that some people are cursed with writing problems. I normally get "their" and "there" wright but sometimes I slip, I still after 27 years need to be conscious on what I am writing.

Near the end of high school, I recall seeing people make the "their" vs "there" vs "they're" mistake and others like it and thinking that they had to be absolute idiots.

Now 15 years and much computer usage later, I make the mistake myself sometimes. And when I see myself do it, I think I must be an absolute idiot.

Perhaps this is just all the more evidence that computers make you dumber? No, I think it just has to do with how much reading and writing you do. In school I was constantly reading and writing so I very thought of those as three clearly different concepts. Now I do a lot less reading and writing (email and Slashdot don't count!) and more conversing; in the spoken language the three are interchangeable, so the distinctions blur in my mind unless I stop to think consciously about it.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Skjie]

get "their" and "there" wright but sometimes I slip You did that on purpose, right?

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Mark of THE CITY]

No, jest a spill checker.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[compgenius3]

This is very true. I used to actually finish a paper in twenty minutes. It now takes me over two hours to write a well written paper. Even then, my teacher gives me a poor grade. Nevertheless, I don't turn off Instant Messenger or e-mail or music, I simply set myself as away and minimize Outlook Express. In fact, I should be doing English homework at this very moment, but instead I'm here posting on /., who knows maybe if things were actually available online for students they might actually get some work done. Then again, maybe not. Oh well!

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Chuck Chunder]

Now 15 years and much computer usage later, I make the mistake myself sometimes. And when I see myself do it, I think I must be an absolute idiot.

Joking aside I experience the same thing. It happens much more when I am firing off a "quick" email response or something similar. I wonder if it's part of the "multi-tasking" work pattern and a part of my brain has already moved onto whatever's next before it finishes with the email.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Schuler]

I think the use of broadband internet as well as multitasking and more importanly, lack of self control are the reasons for lack of learning. The fact that I can keep my AIM with the compulsive need to check it every five minutes, accompanied by winamp and firefox with infinite time wasting abilities, while I'm trying to write up my lab report is not a winning combination. If I was able to pull my ethernet cord out from my jack I can gurantee I would get much more work done and be able to focus on work. I'm sure many people can attest to this.
As useful as the internet is for homework and research, parents should really limit internet usage or atleast allocate time for their kids away from the computer (or the TV) to set aside to do schoolwork. I always did my best work in high school when my cable modem was acting screwy or I was forced off the computer.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[sconeu]

In school I was constantly reading and writing so I very thought of those as three clearly different concepts

And apparently you now have problems counting as well :) Yes, I know you meant to include conversing. :)

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Our brains modify themselves to fit there environment. If their are people making that mistake alot, well end up making it ourselfes. Its not like we don't like want not to.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[MicklePickle]

They will do there work to avoid being yelled at by there parents/teachers but not for the point of learning the information
Their work is their own and not over there.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

Um, he was referring to the three "they're|their|there" concepts, so he doesn't have any trouble counting :P

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[BollocksToThis]

You did that on purpose, right?

Rite!

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[siriuskase]

Same here, homonym swaps never happened when I was younger, now, it's hear/here, site/sight, they're/there/their/ and write/rite/right all the time. I think it's because I type so much without reading while I type. thank /. for the preview button.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[jellomizer]

Multi-tasking just as long as you are very careful. And with 80x50 character resolution. Still with Desqview most people don't dare to push more then 3 apps at the same time. And the Desqview days are a bit After the Apple II days Desqview was more of a 386/486 thing.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Hobadee]

Agreed. That's the number 1 reason I didn't get any papers done, cause I would open it up, then see who was on IM, and ooh! I haven't talked to that person in ~5 mins! Let's see what's new with them! And the paper would sit there without so much as my name on it!

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[dilvish_the_damned]

Most kids don't naturally have a since of focus if they have the chance they will do other things that are more enjoyable then homework. They will do there work to avoid being yelled at by there parents/teachers but not for the point of learning the information, so with modern computers they can get the work done without learning the information because there mind is split on many tasks.

Just like work.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Beek]

> Most kids don't naturally have a since of focus if they have the chance they will do other things that are more enjoyable then homework.

Finally, a good use for Windows XP Starter Edition!

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[bwy]

Damn good point. In fact, this is a problem with productivity in offices as well. You're always stopping whatever you're doing to check email, send an IM, check the latest news, read slashdot, whatever. I never put together the correlation of this behavior with multi-tasking before, but you are exactly right on.

Of course, I'm not saying it is the computer's fault for being too powerful- as an employee it is my job to focus. I suppose if I can't do it, it is my own problem.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[iphayd]

Actually, to fix your grammar...

You do realize that some people are cursed with writing problems. I normally get "their" and "there" wright but sometimes I slip, I still after 27 years need to be conscious on what I am riting.

(BTW, this is a joke)

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right, and now that I'm in college, and my parents don't get a report card mailed to them, I just quit going to class and doing the work. What's the point anyways? Study a miserable set of mental hamster running perpetually forever in the wheel tasks hoping to eventually use the fact that you completed a designated course of study to get a crappy job that you hate? Then you never make enough money, so they give you a bunch of credit so you can get up to your ears in debt. WTF, this world sucks. The American dream never was. Friendly fascism, once a slave, always a slave, even if since a child, everyday in school, they tell you that you have no chains... how many fingers do you see? at least then you know it's possible... hmmm.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Madmonky1]

They will do there work to avoid being yelled at by there parents/teachers but not for the point of learning the information

That a problem with the school system, not computers.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[kyleday]

I bet you're a democrat

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[einhverfr]

I too must be conscious of what I am riting when, for example, I am wrighting a program with a great deal of pomp and ceremony.

Not as incorrect as you think, just not the choice of words we would normally use.

And for the obligatory Calvin and Hobbs reference, "Verbing weirds language."

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[ErikTheRed]

Back then I was working at Egghead Software at the time so I had fairly unlimited access to evaluation software and lots of time to fuck around with it - so I know of what I speak :-). First there was standard Desqview, which ran on PC-AT (80286) class machines and better. Apple ][+'s were on the way out back then, but the ][e's were still in vogue. Of course, later on there was Desqview 386 which had better memory protection and virtualization. I actually got pretty good with it, to the point where I could run Desqview and Windows 3.1 together at the same time. But you needed plenty of RAM, and a very tweaked and stable QEMM-386 config (637KB low memory free w/ mouse, CD-ROM, Stacker, NAV and SpeedDisk, bitch).

Of course, then I switched to OS/2...

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[CountBrass]

I suspect it's because people posting to slashdot (and generally on the inter-web) are using the "speaking" part of their brain, where there is no difference between their, there and they're, rather than the "writing part".

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Oligonicella]

Ummm, don't cover up a failure to go back and read what you are writing with a fancy word like "multi-tasking". It's called editing, and is an intrinsic part of good writing. It may fail you occasionally, but it's easy to spot someone who doesn't bother. Not bothering can be construed as inconsideration for the reader.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

don't be so petty. narrow minded fool, you've been taken for a sucker. there a whole world of reality that you missed out on. if you believe in re-incarnation, maybe you'll do a little better in your next life. anyways, asshats like you remind me to not feel sorry for what's going to happen next.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the use of broadband internet as well as multitasking and more importanly, lack of self control are the reasons for lack of learning. The fact that I can keep my AIM with the compulsive need to check it every five minutes, accompanied by winamp and firefox with infinite time wasting abilities, while I'm trying to write up my lab report is not a winning combination. If I was able to pull my ethernet cord out from my jack I can gurantee I would get much more work done and be able to focus on work. I'm sure many people can attest to this.

One word: firewall. On my home LAN, when the 16 yo Boy's grades start to fall [like recently], his machine is blocked from any access to the Internet except for mail. he still has the ability to use OpenOffice and other things he needs, but the Internet is gone [while I sit in the other room and can still use it].

My 12 yo daughter typically has better grades, but more of a disrespect of parental authority thing. When that flares up, I change her password. She gets it back when her behavior improves.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[fikx]

"... I always did my best work in high school when my cable modem was acting screwy or I was forced off the computer...." [emphasis mine]

Anyone else think that sentense was put in there just to be mean? Or am I just feeling old and grumpy?

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Chembryl]

Agreed.

I always found it odd that of all places, slashdot (where automation of tasks such as parsing of text into spell checkers and compilers should be king) posters seem to take such joy out of 'trolling' each other over grammar and spelling mistakes.

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[sconeu]

DOH!

Re:Nature of computer usage changed.

[Reziac]

I suspect there is also a good bit of "finger dyshomonymia" (a word I just made up). Frex, my fingers often type "won" when I meant "one", and will do so without consulting my brain, which knew perfectly well which word it meant.

XBOX + HALO2 + INTERNET = FAIL

[Proudrooster]

I am attending college right now, I can definately tell you that XBOX + HALO2 + INTERNET = FAIL. The same can be said for EverQuest or EverQuest2 (aka EverCrack) on a PC. Computers are really, really bad for people with addictive personalities. Sorry, I write a longer comment, but my Guild needs me in battle........ :)

It's too bad that computer games can't be more educational.

I install Slackware...

[Anonymous Coward]

...and when they ask "how does this work?", I mumble 'RTFM' under my breath as I walk away.

Come on!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Christian Science" No wonder they are postign this crap. Religion and science do nto belong in the same room.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

The TV

[Hardwyred]

I have a feeling that in those households the computer was looked at much like the TV. A plugin babysitter that keeps junior quiet and out of the way. When used in that manner, yeah the computer can have some negative impacts on your kid. People seem to have forgotten that children need to be stimulated and challenged. TV and the internet can be great tools but can also be pretty mind numbing. My wife and I are about to have our first kid and have been talking about these type of things at length and we both feel very strongly that it is our job to make sure that our son is engaged in things that he finds entertaining but that have more value to them then simply "at least he's quiet". That means we have to actually spend time with our son, in fact, we have to take an interest in his daily life (gasp)! It always shocks me how many parents in our neighborhood either don't know where their kids are and what they are doing or prefer to just sit them down in front of some gizmo instead of getting involved in what they are doing. But hey, we haven't actually had our kid yet, so of course right now I have all the answers and know exactly how it's all gonna work out. Check back in around 10 years.

Interesting...

[cartzworth]

...I have 8 computers in my house and my sister and myself were both in the top 10% of our high school classes of ~800 students.

I Can't Believe...

[MrRage]

I'm reading this thread when I have to study for finals.

Now you know...

[lathama]

And knowing is half the battle...

Computer ownership and use are the issue here. I have had access to computers most of my life and have found the external forces pushed me into the IT industry. Constructive challenges from peers and physical injury are the foundations of my knowledge.

As far as grades or learning ablity I have found that the size and type of a childs village is the only factor. It takes a village to raise a child and some parents outsource that as well.

eh

[Aggrazel]

It all depends on what you use the computers for. If you let your kids play videogames everyday, sure their minds aren't going to be challenged and they will get worse grades.

Its not the computer that is evil, its what parents let their kids do with them.

Frankly I don't find this study worthwhile at all. Of course a study done by educators is going to tell you to stay away from computers. People fear what they don't understand and frankly 95% of the educators out there have no clue when it comes to computers.

heh, why do you think the Mac is so popular at schools? (j/k mac people, don't hurt me)

Re:CHILDREN!

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, this is one of those "hypothetically speaking" instances. Of course slashdotters don't have kids because that would imply they were getting sex. Which isn't the case.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

I'm a kid :)

[Batory]

Well i'm 17, and to be honest. 80% of all my friends who use computers daily for either games, linux, etc, get distracted really quickly from our work. I think what it comes down to is the individual. If he's the type of person who really wants to get straight A's in school, he's not gonna waste his time beating half-life2, he's gonna do his paper for tomorrow. Just on a personal note, when I sit down to do homework next to my computer, well.....i'm not going to be doing homework anytime soon. And, it's because, as stated before, why would an immature kid do homework when he can bust out the music and read up on some slashdot!

I agree.

[blueforce]

I'm a code monkey and a moderately smart.

Things I used to know by heart I've purged from my mind (mostly unintentionally) over the years. Although, I did purge my computer architecture class - MUXes, flip-flops, etc. on purpose. ugh.

Partly because I don't use that knowledge as much and partly because it's WAY too easy to jump on *.google.com and look something up. Heck, in a lot of cases, just typing a query and pounding the enter key is enough. I can usually find that nugget of information or trivia fact I'm looking for in the short description that shows up on the results screen without ever having to follow any links. Google dumbs me down.

I've turned to reading more books to combat the problem. I try to read a variety of topics that interest me such as physics, math, biology, and economics and even fiction novels too. I find that the variety of information and learning new things helps keep me "fresh" and sharp in spite of google and kcalc.

I think it's way too easy to open up a calculator, spreadsheet, web browser, [insert app here] to do things one should be able to do, or at least know how to do, by hand.

Re:I agree.

[miu]

I don't know that you actually ever purge information from your mind (short of actual damage), but you can lose it into long term memory where you need some help to recall it. That is why you can search google and get the details on an API call or whatever, someone who never learned the foundation skills would not get nearly as much out of it.

I think this applies to child learning as well. Computers are great at providing instant feedback and wide ranging (but often shallow) knowledge, but the web and newsgroups are not a place to learn foundations. I don't believe computers are harmful to learning by themselves, if they are it is because of the tendency of people to treat them as a magical learning box and ignore essentials or allow them to be a distraction.

In themselves computers are nothing more than a tool that can become a toy, or an encyclopedia, or a TV, or set of flashcards, or whatever. The only kids that are going to influenced to the good solely by the presence of a computer are those interested enough to want to learn to program. They are going to pick up a lot of skills that can be applied to problem solving and learning.

Re:I agree.

[Anonymous Coward]

This really doens't apply to code monkeys...
That's just called working with the tools you have.

If you didn't have the internet and google, you would have more reference books, more discussions with colleagues, and you would spend more time looking things up, not less.

Look in the past at pre-internet code monkeys.
Far fewer tools, far harder collaborate, much narrower focus.

You retain what you need and use daily. THe fact that you can't draw a logic diagram for a flipflop from memory is irrelevant if you don't work with flipflops. you know you could crack your digital logic textbook open and refresh yourself in about 5 minutes should you need it.

Re:I agree.

[Archon-X]

I agree totally. I've spent the last 2 years working from home, glued to a screen. I have felt my social skills and general knowledge take a dive over this time.

It's not as if I'm not active otherwise, I dance, take photography and cook - so I'm slightly stumped as to where it's all going wrong, but hey.

Re:I agree.

[asadsalm]

Hmmm, lots of religions have an "End of Times" prediction stating that "Knowledge will decrease enough though there is plenty of information".

That sounds just like the effect internet search engines are having!

Re:I agree.

[meadowsp]

Sounds like fun, what, do you dance around the cooker keeping some sort of photo diary of your creation?

Re:I agree.

[Archon-X]

Only when I'm trying to make it rain ;)

problem=education

[pha777]

The problem is not on computers, the problem is on the methods that are used in education. Today we have access to information that we did not have before, nevertheless the study methods continue being the same.

It seems to me...

[kjones692]

... that this article is going two different places at once. One part of the problem is stated here:

[i] "And while students seemed to benefit from limited use of computers at school, those who used them several times per week at school saw their academic performance decline significantly as well.[/i]

And another part is here:
[i]From a sample of 175,000 15-year-old students in 31 countries, researchers at the University of Munich announced in November that performance in math and reading had suffered significantly among students who have more than one computer at home.[/i]

Really, these are two separate issues. How to use computers appropriately in the classroom seems to be quickly becoming an issue of much debate, and it's important that teachers do not use computers as a substitute for real teaching.

However, the correlation between poorer grades and more computer use at home is really an issue for parents to resolve with their own children.

computers today are just different

[Rooked_One]

before, when we were kids, computers were a tool. My first real experience with a computer was a 286 and my first "real" experience was with an AppleII and I learned how to do a bit of programming on there. Sure there were rudeamentary games, but you had to use your head.

Nowdays, you just get a computer to do two things. Play games and learn, or just play games. I wonder which ones that they have choosen for this survey?

Legitimate or propaganda?

[My Iron Lung]

I'm sorry, but the Christian Science Monitor? Are you kidding me?

Re:Legitimate or propaganda?

[djdavetrouble]

The Christian Science Monitor is widely respected as a news source, do your research.

Re:Legitimate or propaganda?

[My Iron Lung]

Okay "djdavetrouble", but in my experience, science and religion don't usually get along too well. So forgive me for thinking that a science institute founded by Christians might try to tell us that computers are bad for kids to serve their own best interests.

Re:Legitimate or propaganda?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Christian Science" is the name of a religion started by Mary Baker Eddy in Boston in the 19th century. Main issue they have with causality is that they believe that prayer is the only effective way to maintain health. But their newspaper is widely respected as an independent and sane voice in journalism. Sometimes it happens that way: despite the Catholic Church's centuries of hostility to many forms of science, even before the late 20t century rapproachment, Jesuits made pretty damned good scientists.

Re:Legitimate or propaganda?

[PureCreditor]

The phrase "christian science" is oxymoron at its best. A thousand years ago the church said the sun rotates around the earth. A few hundred years ago the church said the earth is flat. These days the church say sexual orientation can be altered at will. And throughout history, the church says evolution never occurred.

Christian Science ? Just as close to reality as Cold Fusion.

Re:Legitimate or propaganda?

[djdavetrouble]

Okay, "My Iron Lung" does your experience include doing research about things you know absolutely nothing about before opening your piehole on a public forum? Christian Science is not a "Science institute founded by Christians", rather it is an actual religion (wacky as THEY ALL may be) founded by a woman named Mary Baker Eddy. The Monitor's sole religious presence is a single article in each issue.

I quote from Wikipedia, full article text follows:
The Christian Science Monitor is an international daily newspaper published Monday through Friday. It was founded in 1908 by Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of the Church of Christ, Scientist. The paper relies primarily on its own reporters in bureaus in eleven countries around the world, for the most part church members, though decreasingly so in recent decades.

Despite its name, the Monitor was not established to be a religious-themed paper, nor does it seek to directly promote the church's doctrine. A daily religious article however has appeared in every issue of the Monitor since its founding, reportedly at Eddy's direct request. Eddy also specifically provided for the inclusion of "Christian Science" in the paper's name, over the initial opposition of some of her advisors, who thought it would not go over well with a secular readership.
The paper's inception was in part her response to the infamous yellow journalism of her day. Shortly after Eddy's Science and Health with Key to the Scriptures was published, the book's popularity caught the attention of Joseph Pulitzer. Eddy was 86 years old at the height of her popularity and wealth, when Pulitzer launched a campaign to wrest control of Eddy's estate from her through the attentions of his newspaper, the New York World. He eventually persuaded disaffected former friends and her one son to sue for control of her estate. The World harassed Eddy with prolonged controversy to force the case to court, where the "Next Friends Suit" was eventually dismissed. Eddy gave the Monitor the mission "to injure no man, but to bless all mankind." Pulitzer went on to endow the prestigious Pulitzer Prize for journalism, which the Monitor subsequently went on to win seven times.

Full Wikipedia Article

Re:Legitimate or propaganda?

[djdavetrouble]

You think you've got problems, Im the son of a christian scientist and a jew, and married a black catholic woman.
My daughter wanted to see a picture of Heaven to see if she would like it.

Anyway, see my reply to the other person that didn't know what the christian science monitor was or what it stood for. Christian Science is just another religion, FYI, and pretty decent people if not a little strange.

hmmm

[fastduke]

Well my son is almost 5 years old now and he has a computer in his room. He plays educational games and such. Normally I will show him once how to start one of his games and then it's up to him after that. He normally does very well and finds the proper CD and runs the game (ie Reader Rabbit). Once in awhile he'll run into computer related problem and asks for help but otherwise he does pretty good. I see this as a very good reason for him to have a computer at 5 years of age. I wouldn't know how it will be in 10 years but I imagine I will supervise his activity just as I do now with TV.

Incomplete Study?

[DarkBlackFox]

I didn't see mentioned anywhere in the article what types of software these kids were running. If they spend all their time playing "educational" software (by which I mean those counting programs/nick jr. type games which serve more to keep the kids out of parents hair than teach the kids anything useful)in place of learning from a teacher, of course grades will decline. All a computer can do is teach a kid basic functions related to specific areas of study. It can't answer questions or provide more insight into "why" rather than "how."

The flip side would be what they actually get to do on the computer. If the parents limit them to games and programs they set up for the kids, that's almost as bad as spoonfeeding an 8 year old. The technically oriented/geek parents (or, were I one, this is what I would do), make a ghost/dd/carbon copy/backup of your hard drive, and let the kid loose for a few hours to do whatever he wants. If you're a true geek, the kid would have his/her own dedicated computer to play with, to let him find his own way around. Show the kid how to use the mouse, and how to click. Teach them the basics of how to use the computer, and let them learn their own way. That's how I was brought up, and I'm more capable of using/building/working on/maintaining computers than 99.9999% of all the people I know. Plop me in front of a foreign interface I've never seen before and I'll figure out the basics of how to use it within a few minutes (or if in another language, hours).

Computers can be extremely powerful tools for learning, but only if used in proper context. Parents who use the computer as an electronic baby-sitter will find their kid's grades slumping, while a kid who figures out the basics of the bash shell by the age of 5 could probably graduate high school at the age of 10. Give kids the tools to foster deductive reasoning, and they'll blossom into students with an insatiable appetite to learn and figure stuff out.

Re:Incomplete Study?

[The Spanish Ninja]

When I was 10 or 11 or so (so, 12, 13 years ago), we got our first "real" computer. It was an Easy Data IBM-compatible 486dx33, running 4MB RAM and a 170MB hard drive. Came with some old version of DOS. My parents spent about $2000 on it. As soon as I got to sit in front of it, I started trying to figure out how/why it worked. I had always been curious about the how/why of things, and previously I had only used AppleII's. Oh, and a commodore 64 of which I have absolutely no memory. My mom answered the questions she could (the basics of RAM, CPU's, and operating systems), but it wasn't enough. I talked to my geeky friends at school (the only ones I had, really), combed the library, everything. I got into games, which ultimately became my downfall, but I still play them. Ahh, Wolf3D and 4D-Boxing.

When I got my copy of Diablo, years later, it said I should install DirectX 3.0. P133 w/16MB RAM and Windows95. Yech. So, I did it. Big mistake. For some reason, it didn't like my machine, and so my video display options dropped to 640x480x16 colors. Sweet. I spent hours trying to undo the damage, working frantically to get it fixed before my mom got home, sweating furiously, because I knew she would flip out. My dad spent the whole time sitting on the couch watching TV and laughing at me, telling me how busted I was going to be. Anyway, long story still long, I got it fixed about 30 seconds before she walked in the door. Whew.

What I'm getting at with this tedious anecdote is that really, even in todays world of adware, spyware, viruses, etc, there is nothing your child can do to your computer that can not be undone. Of course, it may take a full wipe and reinstall of your OS, so keep your importand stuff backed up, but if you limit your kids to a few activities only, they will never learn anything. It seems as though all the mistakes we made when we were learning has bred a fear into us of our children causing us those headaches all over again, but if we don't just let them face it, we will breed a generation of people who can do s much with a computer as my dad, which isn't much at all.

That's my piece. Peace.

Re:Incomplete Study?

[Boglin]

there is nothing your child can do to your computer that can not be undone.

Have you ever tried to get oatmeal out of a CD-Rom drive?

Re:Incomplete Study?

[Garretjax-unb]

When i was growing up our family was on of the fist multibox familes in the area, both my sister and i turned out fine, and both with noteable technical expertise.

I believe this is in part, for hte most part due to how our parents, particularly my father, introduced and handled our initiation on computers.
When i inherited my first hand-me-down box, his words to me had great influence in where i am today - he said "Here, this is now yours, if you break it, you fix it, if you don't know how to fix it, or can't figure out how to fix it, i'll show you"
And alot of times i broke it - and at first alot of times he showed me how to fix it.. later i started to fix it more on my own - the internet had an effect in this increase.
The point is, yes i have wasted alot of time on computers, but much of the knowledge i have about computers is based on events casued by that one sentence my father said on giving me his old box. Admittedly it probably doomed me into my fate as a self admitted geek - but hey, its something i enjoy and am making a careeer out of.
In my introduction to the internet, i learned of chat rooms and game sites same as anyone else, but my folks showed me ways of finding information on the internet - and my mother, who is less techie and more artsie, taught me how to look at information found and begin to identify the useful from the crap.

Getting to the point, I tend to disagree with the report in that if the child is given a situation where they are encouraged to use the computer for learning first, then fun later [or better is learning that is actually fun; how i first learned programming] then be it one box or more, can be benificial to a family with children, but it is scenario dependant on how the partend envolve them with computer - if like above or similer, it can be helpful, but, if they are given a situation of "here's a computer.. go play" then, yeah -- its not gonna help much.

Just my $.02
Garret

Re:Incomplete Study?

[The Spanish Ninja]

OK, you've got me there. I was mainly talking about normal children around age 8 and up. That makes me think of all the old cupholder problems, though. Heh. Thanks for the laugh.

Re:Incomplete Study?

[Anonymous Coward]

...I'm more capable of using/building/working on/maintaining computers than 99.9999% of all the people I know...

So do you know 1 million people, one of whom is more capable than you, or do you know 20,000 people, and only count the brain of the one person who is more capable, or are there other fractions I should be considering?

Correlation != Causation

[Macgrrl]

There have been numerous reports released in Australia recently on how literacy and numeracy standards have been slipping in recent years. There was even an article yesterday commenting on how illeteracy is now being 'diagnosed' as ADHD, with children being taken to emergency rooms for treatment when what they really need is to be taught how to read.

The computer is simply a tool, it has no moral value, if the children are taught how to use it effectively as an educational aid, and are taught to value learning, the unfettered access to a computer will be beneficial. IF the children are taught to treat education as something to be endured and that computers are toys - then that is how they will treat them.

Re:Correlation != Causation

[Frogbert]

Thats just stupid, literacy rates are perpetually falling according to one study or another. The fact is that aside from a few outliers the Australian education system works. I wasn't even taught to spell officially in school they just left us to our own devices to learn to spell, and my entire class did fine.

Re:Correlation != Causation

[utlemming]

Here is an interesting question: literacy rates have, at least their is the perception, been falling for years. Now I question the efficacy of those tests. Language and the use of words evolve with the culture. In 2004 we are not exactly using words used in 1984 or 1964 and so on. Each generation has its own unique idiosyncracies that define a culture of its own. And the language that each generation uses has a unique cultural identifier to it. You can readily identify 80's cultural language, just as you can identify other generations cultural languages. It seems that those tests that messure literacy don't account for the literary and colloquial changes that happen on a generational basis. My bet is if the literacy tests actually accounted for changes in the use of language that it would probably show some change.

Multitasking?

[simpl3x]

I'm procrastinating!

More of my own proplem

[TooTechForYou]

I don't know how many times I've been sitting in one of my classes (other than my CS classes of course ;-)) and instead of paying attention in class I was using the school's wi-fi to surf the web.

"Learning" != "Academic performance"

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think we should discount the possibility that the education system is so utterly fscked that these students are getting poor grades precisely because they've learned how to think.

how do you deal with your kids' computer use?

[Timesprout]

If I find my kid trying to snort a computer or worse, mainline one its military school.

damn I must be really stoopid...

[Anonymous Coward]

I actually do have a Beowulf cluster (of P-III's). Since I'm a student and I work in a lab around these machines...

It's just time management

[Fiz Ocelot]

Most kids and I'd say a large amount of adults are not very good at time management. I mean, here I am posting on Slashdot when I really need to finish some work ;)

So as far as school performance goes, parents really need to promote good time management and take an active role in how much time their kid spends on entertainment and education. The same thing applies to employee internet access, etc etc.

The problem goes far beyond computers.

Coputers teach new methods....

[kyleday]

Did they account that the teaching methods in schools as well as the curriculum they teach are still based on 19th century standards? Why do they still teach cursive writing? I was always told that it was necessary to learn for classes in high school and college, though not a single class even accepted anything less than typed work. I never once, not once used cursive. Schools are still based in curriculum that has little to nothing based upon the new educational topics that computers offer (computer science, typing, conversing skills, hand-eye coordination, hands-on hardware and software experience, etc....) I doubt this report takes into account the beneficial and educational leaps that computers offer, instead I bet it focuses on why children won't write in cursive....if you get my point

Reader Rabbit Meets Master Chief

[Bryan Gividen]

Need I say more?

I wasn't affected

[Anonymous Coward]

I grew up with 4+ computers and I graduated Top 10.

This is just an excuse.

OS dependant

[bstadil]

The article mentions computers like it's a uniform thing. I will bet anything if you segment the result by OS you will find a much different result.

(I am not implying causality just differences in make up of students)

"Family Values"

[jwind]

Ahh come on. Of course the CHRISTIAN science monitor is going to print such results... They've been out to get computers since first days porn was uploaded to the WWW ;P

Re:"Family Values"

[jwind]

see^ someone didn't like my values...flame away.

Bah

[Anonymous Coward]

Yet another scapegoat for Bad parents. And i doubt Christian Science wants children finding out about Bush Science on the internet. Socialist Science is no better but not nearly as bad in the USA as in Canada. Its horribly disgusting and nobody knows it. Libertarian the only way imo.

Yeah Right...

[PeaceTank]

THis is not true at least from my point of view. I'm currently a student at the Illinois Mathematics and Science Academy (11th grade) and I've grown up with computers. I currently have seven, just to throw this off a bit more, and some of my earliest memories are with our 286, 386, 486, and all the way up the line. I've had computers around me all my life, and all it seems to have done was help. I'm in the top 2% of students in the state, and have always loved my comps. They just gave me an outlet to use whenever I needed, and still do. I'd suggest the scientists who conducted this study maybe find a few test subjects whose computers weren't just used for pr0n or only for gaming.

5 Computers. 4 People. Straight A students.

[NotQuiteReal]

We have 5 computers in a 2 adult, 2 child household.

Both kids go to private schools (much to the pain of my checkbook) and both get straight "A"s.

I dunno, works for me.

We use the computers all the time - in "local" mode, for convenience items like copying timed math practice tests (scan and print), or on-line, for high-schoolers searching for google images for "art" ideas, etc. I don't see how computers can hurt.

Frankly, my analogy is this: "if you live in a world without calculators, you should have been studying how to kill things with a pointy stick". The same applies to computer use. I need to update my epitaph.

Re:5 Computers. 4 People. Straight A students.

[DreadfulGrape]

We are in a very similar situation. Two parents, two teenage sons, a computer for each and then some. Plus we're home-schoolers. Next year, when our oldest boy is a senior, he'll be able to join a dual-enrollment program online with a local college.

Blaming computers for kids' failures is just like blaming TV, or rock'n'roll, or any other potential distraction. It's just a scapegoat for poor parenting.

We have a few rules, and it works

[Ralph Spoilsport]

and they are draconian, but tough.

1. No computer games. Yup. None.

2. TV has to be PBS, Discovery or History Channel during the week, and no more than one hour.

3. the computer is used for schoolwork and research.

4. No TV in the bedroom.

5. No headphones indoors, no excessive volume indoors.

6. No TV during Dinner. conversation is encouraged. Dinner is served at the dining table 5 nights a week (Friday is swimming, so dinner is shortened, as we go out for a snack after swimming, and Saturday dinner is often out (and never at a fast food joint.)

7. One DVD may be rented a week.

8. books, magazines, and newspapers can be read at anytime except during meals.

9. Homework is done FIRST. Then play is permitted. Making things with paper, glue, wood, paint, ink, rubber stamps, etc. is encouraged. Puzzles, word games, and other intellectual riddles are encouraged.

10. Music is always permitted, but at reasonable volumes. Playing music and singing is especially encouraged, and preferred to listening.

That's the way the house is organised, and mommy and daddy (me) follow the same rules. No exceptions.

We have 7 computers in the house, but 2 of them (a win2k laptop and an XP laptop) are for my wife's office, three are in my studio (OSX laptop, OS9 tower, SuSe "project" machine), my daughter has a desktop (Apple OS9) and a laptop (OSX). She uses them, but not as much as she reads books. she also likes to make books - she has a good head for narrative.

She (Elizabeth Spoilsport) is 7, is bilingual in French and English, writes in cursive, and does her times tables. She can recognise 4/4, 3/4, and 5/4 time signatures. She's my little pride and joy, when she's not acting like a spoiled little snot (which only happens when she's tired or grumpy).

She also feeds the kitties, waters the kitchen herbs, (fresh basil is DIVINE), and when she gets all A's in her work, we give her a small allowance which she then divides up between a savings account, an investment account, a charity account, and a spending account.

And that's how it works in the Spoilsport household.

RS

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

My God, what is the suicide rate in this country?

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[That's Unpossible!]

No computer games. Yup. None. ...
The computer is used for schoolwork and research.

It sounds like you are discouraging creative computer use? Why?

What if your kid could be a great computer programmer? What if they wanted to create a video game?

The right computer games encourage thinking.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[HarveyBirdman]

Making things with paper, glue, wood, paint, ink, rubber stamps, etc. is encouraged.

Try these: http://icandream.com/crafts/a/ribbon/fish/index.sh tml

I'm 39 and I like making these when I'm relaxing after work. I give them away to the ladies at work, and I am beloved. ;-)

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[andy314159pi]

>>My God, what is the suicide rate in this country?

I see that we were trying to make some sort of social commentary, but unfortunately, it didn't fit the discussion at all. I'm confused about what you even intended to imply. You're an idiot.
Thanks

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[GerbilSoft]

3. the computer is used for schoolwork and research.

Then what the heck are you doing here?

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[kfg]

What if they wanted to create a video game?

1. Develop solid math skills
2. Develop solid physics skills
3. Profit!!!

KFG

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[rossz]

Having worked in the computer game industry I can safely say, "playing a bunch of computer games in no way prepares you for a job in creating games."

You heard me right. Book learning is much more useful. Math and science are useful for doing technical stuff like optimizing the display and creating realistic physics. Other non-computer fields are useful, too. Sociology, geography, statistics, etc. The list goes on.

Spending all your time playing computer games means you are only familiar with WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Rie Beam]

"She (Elizabeth Spoilsport) is 7, is bilingual in French and English, writes in cursive, and does her times tables. She can recognise 4/4, 3/4, and 5/4 time signatures. She's my little pride and joy, when she's not acting like a spoiled little snot (which only happens when she's tired or grumpy)."

Yes, and we'll see how long this lasts once she hits the teen years.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[RedWizzard]

and they are draconian, but tough.

I hope your daughter doesn't go off the rails when she leaves home. When you grow up with that amount of regimentation a little freedom can be intoxicating.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[That's Unpossible!]

I didn't say you need to play video games to write them. I stated two separate issues. (1) Playing video games can be educational. (2) How could his kids do something creative on the computer, such as programming a video game, within his current set of rules, which limits the computer use to research?

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Sarev0k]

But how would you know that you wanted to create video games, if you've never played them. Math and science (mainly physics) are especially useful in game development, but if you have never played a video game, what in the nine hells would make you decide to be a game developer?

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Sweetshark]

Having worked in the computer game industry I can safely say, "playing a bunch of computer games in no way prepares you for a job in creating games."
Hmmm. Sounds interesting ...
You heard me right. Book learning is much more useful. Math and science are useful for doing technical stuff like optimizing the display and creating realistic physics. Other non-computer fields are useful, too. Sociology, geography, statistics, etc. The list goes on.
That maybe right from the technical point of view. But not from the motivational point of view. Books dont help you there at all.
Spending all your time playing computer games means you are only familiar with WHAT HAS ALREADY BEEN DONE.
... and finding out what you always missed. Of cause the 40-millionth FPS doesnt help at all. But games like civilisation and lemmings were original. The creators probably knew what had already existed and needed to know that to create such great games. (Ok, Civ might be a bad example as a computer game since its idea is from a boardgame, but as far as creativity goes the same rules apply for boardgames as for computergames - it might even be harder).
I suspect, that playing computer games became so naturally to you that you didnt even realize what you learned from it.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Ralph Spoilsport]

thanks! Those look fun - right up her alley!

best,

RS

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm 39 and I like making these when I'm relaxing after work. I give them away to the ladies at work, and I am beloved. ;-)

uh oh...you must be desperate

otoh...if it works, I might try it as well ;-)

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Actually, slashdot is a great resource for finding things out about The Industry, and Linux "Stuff". I have a SuSe project machine (i.e., it barely works, but I'm learning a lot from beating the crap out of it^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^ coaxing it into operation....)

So Slashdot is very good for that. Also, it is good sociological research into the groupthink of the F/OSS programming community, which is important to my research as an artist.

And, I get to deal with snide too-clever-by-half posters. But thanks for not posting as an AC. I respect that.

best,

RS

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[rossz]

Ok, I phrased it badly. The point I was trying to make was that doing nothing but playing computer games was not going to help you become a game developer. Of course you need to play _some_ games, just don't let it take all the time better spent studying the various academic fields that will help you create a well rounded, robust, and exciting game.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[wot.narg]

3. the computer is used for schoolwork and research. That's the way the house is organised, and mommy and daddy (me) follow the same rules. No exceptions. Does that make Slashdot reseach or homework oh "no exceptions" father?

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Frogbert]

What about hand eye coordination? Believe it or not that is a useful skill to have.

Buy the kid an Xbox for gods sake, that way you know they aren't playing games on your PC and it can easily be turned off.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[OverflowingBitBucket]

What's with no computer games? I can understand discouraging excessive play, but none at all? I would never have gotten into software development if not for playing computer games. I would never have known how rewarding it was to create my own. Without them I'd probably be a mediocre economist or accountant by now and hating life.

I hope you at let your lil' ones play board games, at least for the social aspect.

I'd agree with many of your other rules, disagree with the others, but to each their own. ;)

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[gl4ss]

all that is great and all.. but you don't have much on it 'working' yet. it's easy to keep one away from for example games when you've never played them.

i never touched a computer before i was 7 or so. but after that i was hooked.

but seriously, she's seven and has a laptop?

as for some points, they seem quite american (no tv during dinner - as if it was a shock on the same level as 'no games ever').

and what if it is a riddle programmed on the computer? or self made games?

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Ralph Spoilsport]

I know what you mean, but when it comes to Play: She Goes Outside and Plays With Her Friends in the Backyard. We have a platform built into the hill behind us, and it's great - it's a castle, it's a boat, it's her magic play space, and they all have a blast.

We do play board games, usually on rainy weekends when there is nothing else to do. We also play card games - she's Deadly at UNO, and often beats us at Mille Bourne. I've been teaching her seven card stud poker, too. She liked it for about a month, and then gave up on it.

She also likes to play keyboards and musical instruments, and that is also something we encourage. She picked out Auld Lang Syne on the xylophone the other day, and she's been beating out Frere Jacques and twinkle Twinkle little star for a few months now.

Mom's a programmer, and I'm almost always in front of the screen doing somethign creative, so it's not like she doesn't have a positive notion of the machines...

RS

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Ralph Spoilsport]

glass wrote:

but seriously, she's seven and has a laptop?

both of her computers are things she inherited from me. It's an old Pismo running OSX. Her desktop is an ancient iMac. She rarely uses either of them. She'd rather play with dolls.

as for some points, they seem quite american (no tv during dinner - as if it was a shock on the same level as 'no games ever').

I know - sad - innit? But damn - you wouldn't believe how many American Family plop themselves down in front of the TV and sit and watch the friggin box all night. And when they get up from the couch, they go to bed, and watch TV in bed. It's terrifying. Our neighbours do that. They have this big ass 50 some odd inch DLP TV set and they all sit around it, every night, eating god-knows-what. Then they all go to bed, and you can see little blue glows in each room. Pathetic.

RS

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[ghamerly]

My parents wouldn't let me buy any games for our computer when I was young. But when I was about 12, my father told me I could play any game -- that I programmed myself, and then bought me a Pascal compiler and taught me how to use it. And I wrote games.

Thus, even if you can't purchase games to play, you can create them (given sufficient interest).

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[OverflowingBitBucket]

Good to hear about the board and card games, as well as encouraging outdoor play. Given my background I think we'd fundamentally disagree on the computer game rule, but as for other games I think we're on the same page.

Good on you for encouraging musical creativity. That is one area where I didn't really have much opportunity or encouragement that I sorely regret at my age, and something I'd encourage should I have children one day.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[zx75]

" and they are draconian, but tough."

Yes, draconian AND tough... my, I bet they're pretty strong too.

If it works for you, then by all means do not let me argue against it. But I personally don't agree with the way you run things because I would never have discovered what I love to do under your rules. Very simply I fell in love with all things computer related through games. I credit them with showing me the path to be able to do something I truely enjoy as a living, and that is programming. Without them I would never have been as involved as I am with computers, and I credit my parents foresight by exposing me to them as a kid at a very young age (when computers in the home were still a very new thing) and showing me what I could become.

I don't entirely disagree with how you run things, but for her sake at least expose your child to these kinds of things at some point, supervision and restrictions are good things, but she's going to learn what she likes soon enough anyway, why not in the home where you can oversee things. Otherwise if she finds that she really loves computer games (as an example) she'll be going somewhere else to play, someplace where you aren't there to supervise.

I guess I'm of the opinion to allow kids to do what they want (exception of things that are not permissable for public consumption) with restrictions, rules, and guidance so that they have freedom to choose what they do, but so I can remain watchful.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[alcourt]

Find me three pieces that would be playable by less than a college level performer that use a 5/4 time signature. Much more common would be 2/4 which is often used in music a child of that age might sing or perform. (After just helping my 7 year old prepare for a recital with a piece in a 2/4 time signature,...)

As for the chores, those sound typical for any child of that age. But forget the fresh basil, get the fresh catnip instead. Use it as mint in your cooking and then rub the extra on whatever you want the cats to go crazy over. I find that getting good half sharp paprika (not that tasteless garbage you find in most grocers) is far more useful to me than basil.

But why would you want a child to use that bastardized obsolete handwriting system called cursive? I haven't used it for more than my signature (which is rapidly becoming less of a cursive over the past two years) since fourth grade. It is very difficult to read by a human, never mind a computer, and is really not enough faster than print to justify the cost in reading it. If I want to prepare something quickly, I type it.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[OverflowingBitBucket]

I spent a bit of time in my youth watching arcade games because I couldn't afford to play them. This probably spurred the creative process somewhat. As I got older I got more access to games through the C64. I couldn't afford full-priced games at $50-odd but could get them when they hit the bargain bin at $5. Combine the creative process with a wealth of ideas from the exposure and you're set. :) I've written more mini-games in my time than I could ever count. My original post advocates some exposure to playing games but not too much, although I'd add to that that programming your own shouldn't be limited to the same degree, in fact it should be encouraged. Balanced of course with outdoor play of some sort. ;)

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[omicronish]

Heh I like that. There's discipline in your family, something that's all too lacking in my uncle's family. Here's what I observe:

• TV content is restricted, but the hours are not. The kids have turned into walking cartoon TV guides. It's truly freaky when they know the times of every cartoon we ask them.
• Irrational discouragement of outdoor/physical activities for fear of getting sick.
• Encouragement of computer usage, but really with completely disregard of how it's used. One of my cousins plays Starcraft for hours on end, ALONE.
• No social interaction. They don't hang out with friends, and there's no parental encouragement for such interaction. They're going to become social outcasts at this rate, incapable of dealing with other humans as already evidenced by one of them through unfamiliarity with something called 'friendly competition'. You simply don't cry when you lose against someone in a computer game.
• Parental ignorance. They both go to a private school, and while some private schools may be decent, this one seems like crap to me. One of them is in 7th grade but is doing stuff that's just beyond addition and multiplication. The other is in 4th grade but can't add. The parents notice these problems (mainly because we tell them), but they don't notice just how big of a problem it is. The money wasted on tuition at this particular school already exceeds the money that will be needed for their college educations.
• In general, they don't notice how close to being plants their kids are (and both seem to suffer from ADD). They do nothing about it, and this is the worst part of that household to me.

I'm not a parent yet, but a lot of these things seem like obvious no-no's. Without discipline and rules it seems like kids will degenerate into a low-energy oozing state without any capacity for activity. I've seen them watch TV before. They become like living room fixtures, unmoving, unblinking, and glued to a glowing screen.

I'm not sure if this is on topic anymore, but basically the problem with computer usage can be generalized to a problem of excess, in other words, a lack of constraints and restrictions. Enforce discipline and rules. Don't let them become zombies with computers, or any other activity or device for that matter. The same applies even to academics. Kids who study math 24/7 may become very knowledgeable in math, but they're usually crap as humans as a result.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[bongk]

I think that's great that your family has such a pattern and guidelines, and everyone is thriving in it. Before I was a parent, I pictured our household being like that, too. Then I adopted my son, and learned very quickly that every child is unique. It would be my opinion that your daughter doing so well in the environment you lay out has a lot to do with her natural tendencies, and a lot of other kids would react to that environment much differently.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Woy]

Ralph Spoilsport

I think you misspelled "DoubleStandard".

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Woy]

I got the joke and it's very suitable to the context.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, sounds like you're preparing your kid to rebel when she gets to an age where she realises that she can do whatever the hell she likes and you really can't stop her.

But as she's 7 - I guess you haven't found that out yet.

Watching educational TV shouldn't be a chore (and the discovery channel is the magarine of educational tv btw), computers can be enlightening for many other reasons than schoolwork, taste in music can't be enforced, etc, etc.

It's better you don't come across as an anti-fun nazi - it'll probably come back to haunt you later on.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps it takes playing a few computer games to fully understand what your average user likes and dislikes? Would you also suggest a potential author should sit down and write a book without ever having read one?

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[JollyFinn]

"research" information, this is "news" site.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear God, man. You realize in exactly 10 years you will have single handedly created the single most heroin-addicted backroom quick-trick $5 anarchist crack whore slut in the country? I don't envy you your coming therapy bills.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Rudisaurus]

She's 7. You can't say "it works" until she's about 3 times that age, pal. Tell us about your great results again when she's 20.

What's more, you've only got the one child. Try enforcing that stuff with two or more; good luck with that.

BTW my 20 year-old son was a licensed private pilot at 17 -- but he still spends way too much time playing games on the computer even now. His 18 year-old brother is athletically gifted -- and HE spends way too much time playing computer games. There's not a whole lot I can do about it anymore. And this is in a family which encourages both high academic achievement and athleticism -- and their mother and I can still walk the walk.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[lahvak]

One of the well known high school computer labs (was it Lincoln-Sudbury?) had a rule "You can play any game as long as you wrote it yourself".

I like that approach, but 7 years old is probably a little to early for that.

Anyway, what's the fuss about the "no games" policy? She is 7! There is so much other stuff to do at that age, computer games are such a minor thing. (Of course you let her play Nethack, right?)

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[lahvak]

Find me three pieces that would be playable by less than a college level performer that use a 5/4 time signature. Much more common would be 2/4 which is often used in music a child of that age might sing or perform. (After just helping my 7 year old prepare for a recital with a piece in a 2/4 time signature,...)

Heh, my 6 year old just finished working on a little sight-reading practice piece that was in 5/4. It was sort of a challenge, but it was fun, and I think at the end he enjoyed seeing that not everything must be in 4/4 or 3/4 time signature. He seemed to have fun, anyway.

As for the chores, those sound typical for any child of that age. But forget the fresh basil, get the fresh catnip instead. Use it as mint in your cooking and then rub the extra on whatever you want the cats to go crazy over. I find that getting good half sharp paprika (not that tasteless garbage you find in most grocers) is far more useful to me than basil.

Of course you need both! I mean paprika and basil, even though I wouldn't necessarily combine them in one dish :)

But why would you want a child to use that bastardized obsolete handwriting system called cursive? I haven't used it for more than my signature (which is rapidly becoming less of a cursive over the past two years) since fourth grade. It is very difficult to read by a human, never mind a computer, and is really not enough faster than print to justify the cost in reading it. If I want to prepare something quickly, I type it.

I believe that we have, especially with all the crappy computer typesetting produced by most wordprocessors, forgotten certain aspects of writing. I will always prefere a beautifully written or setted piece of literature to a crappy one. Even if it makes ot harder to read in some cases. Of course I wouldn't write a math paper or technical manual in cursive. Also, have you ever heard of Chinese calligraphy? Writing something carefully in cursive can be more than just quickly puting it down on paper.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[dodobh]

Well, I was only using the computer for .... er,... research, thats right! Research!

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Let her rediscover Tetris then :)=

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[MORB]

Sure, studying maths, physics and stuff can help you to become a good programmer, but so does programming.

I discovered computers at about 7. But the thing is, I started to learn programming early, so I got as much interested by it as I was by video games.
I became utterly focused on computers (ie, my transformation into a geek was complete) at 10. I wasn't entirely bad at school, but I was very lazy and sloppy, and my school performances were rather mitigated.

However, since I spent most of my time programming (or hacking games), it made me good at english (which is not my native language), interested me in maths (although essentialy in those portions that I could immediately see how they could be useful to me as a programmer), and overall, I acquired most of my computer science knowledge on my own.
Overall, this is much more all that computer hobby rather than my homework that makes me good today at my job, even though of course without school I wouldn't have the necessary amount of math and physics knowledge.

So, IMO spending most of your free time on a computer isn't that bad from an educational point of view, if you're more interested in the technical side of things than in playing games.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[hyfe]

Except for the 'no games' factor thats pretty much exactly how we did it at my house. We never had to make any rules about it though, as stuff like 'No TV during dinner' really is just common sense.

The TV should be something you choose to watch because there is something you want to see, not something you do by default. When I get a kid, he's going to have to earn computer/tv-time through soccer etc, and he'll be all the better for it.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

draconian, but tough

Gramatically, that sounds wrong, but incorrect.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

I will always prefere a beautifully written or setted piece of literature to a crappy one. Even if it makes ot harder to read in some cases.

What use is it, as a form of communication, if it renders greater difficulty in that communication?

Yeah, it looks pretty, but it's surely more use to mankind to be able to process the message than to struggle with a variably consistent medium.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Also, it is good sociological research into the groupthink of the F/OSS programming community, which is important to my research as an artist.

You're creating a work of art complex enough to need research, about ./ groupthink? I'm intrigued, unless you're joking.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

Kill me now.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[HarveyBirdman]

Nah, they're all married. I just do it to make the workplace a pleasant place to be.

It's also called "being a nice person" which I realize is an alien concept in this day and age.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Brutulf]

I hope you are kidding.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

1. No computer games. Yup. None.
my daughter has a desktop (Apple OS9) and a laptop (OSX).

Sounds about right to me! ;-) (yes, I'm a mac user myself)

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[bplipschitz]

Find me three pieces that would be playable by less than a college level performer that use a 5/4 time signature. Much more common would be 2/4 which is often used in music a child of that age might sing or perform. (After just helping my 7 year old prepare for a recital with a piece in a 2/4 time signature,...)

One comes to mind: Pentameter March. Played it in 7th grade band.

"Money" by Pink Floyd--my son can play that on the Bass, and he is 16. [Sorry, that's 7/4 time]

"My Way" by Soundgarden is in 5/4. He hasn't worked on that one yet.

Ok, he isn't 7, but odd meter music isn't all that rare. Take the theme from Mission Impossible. . .

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[jdog1016]

I tend to agree. I'm 20 now and I've been playing Civilization and its various sequels since the original came out.

I have learned more from that game than I have ever learned from any textbook, history or otherwise.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[chord.wav]

1. No computer games. Yup. None.
Remember that your kids pick your asylum. Be nice to them.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Headw1nd]

Ok I was all set to jump on this guy, then I read the replies he had recieved already. They made me realize that he actually hadn't done wrong. The replies castigating him ranged from "How can you're kid grow up normal without computer games and trash tv?" to "If your kids don't live their lives out of control they'll never be great." OhKay.. The guy has quite a few rules, but they're not really that bad, people. It kind of scares me that people think they are.

The truth is there are several things going for him in what he's doing now. At 7, responsibility is far more attractive (also appropriate and useful) for a child than independence. A desire for independance will come later, and with years of responsibility under her belt, I don't see why she wouldn't get it. The other thing that works for him in this situation is that she's a girl. Yes, I know someone will jump on me for this, but it's true: Taken as a group, little boys are far more attracted to video games than little girls. This makes rule #1 a bit easier.

I guess the real question here is socialization: Do you enforce your rules by limiting your child's contact with other children (or adults)? Does your child have trouble interacting with other children (and adults) as a result of the way you run your household? These questions go for anybody with kids. If the answer to these questions is yes, then you're doing wrong by your kids. If the answer is no, then full speed ahead.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Chuk]

She (Elizabeth Spoilsport) is 7, is bilingual in French and English, writes in cursive, and does her times tables. She can recognise 4/4, 3/4, and 5/4 time signatures.

But how is she with computers? My daughter can format a partition, install her own software, surf in four or five languages (that I've seen), and the other day she was bidding for some Beanie Baby stuff on eBay. I can't wait to see what she does after she turns five...

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Rick BigNail]

"She's my little pride and joy, when she's not acting like a spoiled little snot (which only happens when she's tired or grumpy)."

I am not the first one to say it, but you really should reflect whether your rules are good for her or just make YOU feel happy.

And is she following your guidelines just to please you? You would either produce a hyper rebellion teenager, or a woman who is not assertive enough to pursue her own interests for her life.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[poppycat]

I was brought up in a strict and regimented household. I was considered a musical prodigy and was pushed hard in that direction. I was discouraged from watching tv and every so often my childs books would be taken from me and replaced with something more 'challenging'. The very second I could do it legally, I left home found the most menial job I could and enjoyed being able to, for the first time in my life, have real fun. Don't push your kids too much. They are like soap and will slip away if you try to squeeze them too tightly.

Re:We have a few rules, and it works

[Anonymous Coward]

I worry, listening to all of this, that she is ridiculously overcommitted. Swimming, music, extra school. What's the point in being a child if you're already as packed as an adult. When was the last time she had a day to herself, doing what she wanted, even if it was nothing? Are you already padding her resume for college? This is nuts!

I was classically trained on the piano starting at the age of four (Suzuki method), so I could recognize 2/4. 4/4, 6/8, 3/4, and probably 5/4 if I wanted. I eventually stopped playing piano because I hated it with a passion. I hated practicing and I still do. I was not multilingual (though I'm up to four or five languages now, depending on whether you count Latin), but I learned caligraphy, tap dance, magic, cards, pottery...and had my first panic attack at 13, my first suicide attempt at 15,

Let her enjoy her childhood. The future is so difficult anyway.

Not true in all cases.

[jmkgh]

I don't think that this study holds true in all cases. I myself am a sophomore in high school, held to the rigorous standards of the world-renowned International Baccalaureate program. I have a 4.3 GPA and am taking the hardest classes available. I spend at least four hours every school night on the computer-- on the weekends, upwards of 10. Another one or two are spent on console games.
I don't see how I could be doing any better in school, quite frankly.

Computer Aided Learning

[jd]

First off, what do you consider a "computer"? Anything with a CPU and memory? In which case, any house with a modern VCR/DVD player, toaster, microwave, etc, has multiple computers. Nobody is suggesting, I hope, that toasters harm children.

(Unless it's the toaster from Red Dwarf.)

If a microwave doesn't count, then I don't think that games machines (X-Boxes, Gameboys, Nintendos) should count, unless they're programmable. (If you've Linux running on an X-Box, then I'd consider it a computer. If you can only get the latest cartridge to work, then you don't.)

Now, what counts as "multiple computers"? A PC cluster? Technically, yes, but it's doubtful the survey considers a 2-processor PC as 2 computers, even though it really is. Would 1 PC, running a multi-tasking OS, with terminals connected, be one machine or many?

Once you've ridiculed the entire concept of the survey, you then move on to the REAL problem - what are the machines being used for?

I don't care if some 14-year-old kid has one machine or a hundred. If they are using the computer(s) as an alternative to working, they will do badly in tests. If they use the computer(s) TO do work, they will do well at tests. If they use the computer(s) to write the next killer game/app/OS, they will likely become rich and famous, no matter what their grade cards are like.

In short, the whole thing is flawed, from beginning to end, and is nothing more than an attempt to push education back to rote learning (which is great for memorizing "facts" but useless for actually understanding anything).

This explains

[Anonymous Coward]

why yall are such idiots

Not hindering learning...

[illumina us]

If anything computers are simply providing that distractive outlet that kids didn't have before. Those who were going to excell in school still will with our without computer usage because of their mindset. Either way, computers are a new learning tool. I know at school many of my classmates and I sat and read the news, slashdot, newsforge, and others of the ilk during class because the class was boring. Granted my classmates didn't recieve the same grade as I did in those classes (A's etc.) they did so because they simply did not care. However, they still learned, and have the same knowledge, if not greater knowledge of the subject matter as I do. Not doing your homework and not learning is a very different matter. School's only really grade on how much effort you put into a class, not how much/how well you learned.

Re:100% of A Students use....

[Macrat]

In other news, 100% of A students have used a pencil at lest once.

My grades fell...

[Lendrick]

...back when i was addicted to playing Quake 2 online. Since most kids use computers to play games and chat with their friends instead of intellectual pursuits such as programming, on average, grades will fall and they won't learn as much.

That said, I've always liked programming for fun, and that's done nothing but help me, especially in the areas of math and logical thinking. The key, I think, is getting people to use computers for creative pursuits (programming, writing, art, music, etc) instead of just entertainment and socialization. Sitting around playing games all day doesn't really expand the mind, whereas creating things arguably does.

Re:My grades fell...

[Tralfamadorian]

Why not do both? Play some perl golf.

Re:My grades fell...

[Lendrick]

Wow, that's my kind of entertainment. :)

RTFA

[Anonymous Coward]

the article doesn't talk about MAGAZINES at ALL!!!

Re:RTFA

[ari_j]

I tried to read the article, but I had too many computers early on and don't know how to read.

People for ethical treatment of computers...

[iamacat]

urges slashdotters to use humane methods to teach their PCs. Too many have been hurt while learning. Every day thousands of PCs toil 24/7 in virus-infested environments, are being forced to run far faster than their natural speed or even have their skins ripped off and replaced with pieces of transparent plastic that expose their living guts. There are also distrurbing reports of unwilling computers being used for sexual gratification of the users.

Proponents of computer abuse often claim that PCs have no feelings. Yet, PETC tests reveal that an average computer matches or exceeds its user in many tests of intelligence, including a chess game. Please treat your PC as you want to be treated - don't force it to work more than 8 hours per day, lay off overclocking and always use protection when visiting questionable websites.

Why even ask?

[slightlyspacey]

You're question presupposes that us Slashdot nerds actually have enough of a life to:

1) Turn off the computer(s)
2) Date (or more accurately, find a girl desperate enough to go out with us)
3) Turn off the computer(s) and go out long enough to have a serious relationship
4) Marry (nowadays optional)
5) Turn off the computer(s)and actually make kids
6) Give up control of one or more of *your* computer(s) so that the aforementioned hypothetical kids can get on the computer(s) so that later, as you realize there is more to parenting than sitting them in front of a computer screen the entire day, you can kick them off

Sounds like a long shot to me.

Re:Why even ask?

[andy314159pi]

This precludes the possibility that you'll get off the computer to make kids in order to turn them into 'build monkeys.' That way they can work on your porting issues while you actually program.

Re:Why even ask?

[archen]

Sounds to me like your post is geared towards reproduction. You know most of that can be accomplished with simply leaving the computer on while it's compiling and making a donation to a sperm bank. Then you don't need to spend time dating or marrying, and someone else raises your kid. Now you have kids (but don't) and still get to use the computer as much as you want without having to share it with them =P

Re:Why even ask?

[Anonymous Coward]

But what happens when I'm really old and I need someone to change the batteries in my anti-senility robot?

poor academic performance and learning

[Anonymous Coward]

poor academic performance and learning are two different things. Strait A's dont always lead to comprehension.

Luddites & knee-jerk reactions

[Anonymous Coward]

So you take away the computers in otherwise the same environment, learning will increase?

What other diversions could we deny children in order to increase their efficiency? I'm sure the computer doesn't top the list - what about the telephone and television? Unisex classrooms are probably a mistake if efficient rote memorization is the goal. Uniforms and corporal punishment have also proven to increase academic scores, as have rigorous physical fitness standards.

What's the point in all this, really? Children can be corrupted in an infinite number of ways; that's the process of life; I'm sure everyone reading this knows at least one from experience. But how is this helpful? It seems like basic fearmongering. By focusing on PC use the CSM gets a concrete target to rail against, but the problem is abstract. They are painting an effect as if it were a cause, and using children as emotional leverage.

christians

[rubee]

those are the folks who don't accept evolution, right?

Warn them...

[CaptainPinko]

that they'll end up like me!

I've seen problems already...

[TWX]

...that are certain to get worse with my girlfriend and her four year old daughter. The only applications available to the little girl are a couple of Reader Rabbit games, but rather severe tantrums occur when she is denied playing the games or asked to stop for the night. I was reminded of my own behavior, though on a slightly different scale when I was fifteen or so and Warcraft II, Quake, and Grand Theft Auto were what dominated my non-schoolwork hours. I flat out had behavioral problems, wanting to do nothing beyond playing the games, and throwing teenager level tantrums when I was denied such.

Fortunately I was in marching band, jazz band, electric car club, and some other structured things for me to redirect myself to when my parents forced the issue and wouldn't let me use the family computer for games, but it definitely wasn't easy, and probably would have been even harder if I hadn't had other activities that I liked to turn to. Consequently I'm paying close attention to what happens in what I'm seeing now, because I know from experience what can happen if things get out of hand.

The moral of my own story: Have something else to do besides computers. Read. Play sports. Play a musical instrument. Work with your hands on something, like cars, or woodworking, or jewelery. Find a passion to compete with the one operating at 1024x768. It's definitely a lot more healthy that way.

LOL!!!1!1!!!

[troykoelling]

OMG THIS ARTICAL IS TEH FUNNI I DONT THINK IT IS TRUE BUT MEBE U DO??? A/S/L ARE YOU HOT? PLZ DONT F1AME ME THNX

And now some filler to get past the filters.

I think there is a certain amount of illiteracy that is spread through the internet. Obviously it's not universal, but there are pockets where language seems to devolve and this is reflected in academics. I know people who sit around and read howstuffworks.com and I know people who sit around and spank the monkey. I don't think the internet caused either one to be as they are, but the internet facilitates it.

Woohoo for you mister genius

[Anonymous Coward]

Guess what, there are a lot of people that aren't like you. You're what we call an "outlier." Jeez, valedictorian to be, and you don't know anything about statistics?

Oh wait, this is slashdot. I forgot that we shouldn't believe everything we see here. I'm betting you're just trolling. You probably manage to get a C average. You did manage to spell valedictorian correctly.

Re:Woohoo for you mister genius

[toggles]

C's get degrees pal, don't you forget it.

Re:Woohoo for you mister genius

[Dr Tall]

You did manage to spell valedictorian correctly.

Google spellcheck :)

A mum's perspective

[Froggy]

I have two daughters aged 7 and 11, and more computers in the house than I can enumerate offhand -- I think there are probably three desktop PCs in bootable condition, plus a DECstation and a couple of laptops. Most of the rest is old 8-bit micros and only comes out when Dad's feeling historically-inclined.

Of course, both kids reckon they should be allowed to either use the computer or watch the TV non-stop between home time and bedtime. We have imposed a few rules: no electronic entertainment devices until after you've done your chores; you may only use one device at a time (so you can't be "watching" That's So Raven while you're playing The Sims); and parents are allowed to set a time limit. I usually allow them an hour each on the TV and the computer.

I agree that computers can be an anaesthetizing influence on some kids -- anything escapist usually gives you the chance to turn your brain off -- but I think that TV is much worse. At least computer games are interactive. Viewers of TV are usually passive recipients of stimuli, and I find that an extended session in front of the TV makes them grumpy and lethargic. Moreover, because their father and I are both computing professionals -- he writes computer games, I'm doing a PhD in CS education -- letting the girls use the computer gives us another way that we can engage with them apart from nagging them over the housework. I'm also trying to role-model geek-grrrl coolness, although I'm probably on the wrong side of thirty to be able to pull it off successfully. :)

Both of our kids are currently in their primary school's gifted children's program, and Number One Child has been accepted into her high school's enrichment program, so I suppose we can't be doing too much harm.

Re:A mum's perspective

[Anonymous Coward]

The difference is that two decades ago, children didn't use computers as a social tool or a game machine. A computer was a tool. A machine. A thing to learn and use, like a car or other machinery. You learned the hardware, the software, how to install, uninstall, troubleshoot things. You learned how to think critically and how to use deductive reasoning. You learned how to research and how to work with your hands. You learned how to write software and how to comprehend complex issues.

Today, kids hop on and play a videogame, watch a video, listen to music or chat with their friends from school and hook up with strangers for dates. To some people, computers are toys. To others, they are powerful machines. It's the difference between spoiled little Sally joy-riding in the expensive car daddy bought her, with no appreciation for the power or responsibility and no comrephension of out the car works - and young Johnny who can build, fix, repair and explain anything to do with an automobile and enjoys knowing them inside out.

It's not the tool. It's the stupid kids and ignorant parents who can't seperate a computer from television.

well...

[dubbreak]

I have finals this week and i'm study^H^H^H^H^H on slashdot. Of course my major is CSc so this counts as studying, or close enough to it.

Just like talking to girls is pretty much like dating them, and chatting online to girls is basically the same as talking to them, and chatting to a bot that emulates a female is basically the same as chatting to a real female.. ergo anyone can have a gf.

good thing i'm not a philosophy(sp?) major.

maybe its the school

[Anonymous Coward]

As a homeschooling parent with muchos-IT in the household (1 HTPC, 2 desktops, 1 server, 1 laptop) I suspect that this reported shortcoming is due to the educational system itself.

Check out this interesting introspective report on technology in schooling:
http://www.mff.org/edtech/discussion.taf?_function =detail&Content_uid1=123

An important quote from the article, I think, is: "The public's direct involvement in improving learning must accompany investments in educational technology," according to Christopher Dede, professor of education and information technology at George Mason University, "If educational technology is to effectively prepare students for the 21st Century, stakeholders in quality education must invest not only their money, but their knowledge and time."

So it looks like in the end its all about interpersonal communication and the time we spend with the kids - regardless if we learn music or C++. And it is exactly this time, which is hard to find in a traditional school setting where the student:teacher ratio is 30:1 and curricula are largish blobs of theory that do not leave room anything out of the ordinary.

I would also like to note an observation, in that my children get quickly bored of "crap" content - be it the volunteer night class, a lousy PC game or run-off-mill TV show. They do not seem to accept products of low educational quality as easily as some of their friends ... maybe homeschooling has spoiled them a bit.

In the same way, I presume, regular schooling desensitizes kids in the wrong way making then accept lower-quality PC based educational content much more easily. Combine that with many PCs in a household, a collection of Dollar-Store EduCDs and you probably get the reported result.

My 0.02 cents - Anyone a teacher? No offense. It is what it is!

broken telephone

[Doc Ruby]

In other news, unsupervised kids with their own telephones gossiped, "shared" their homework and otherwise sabotaged their education with that promising educational tool. "Chat rooms" were especially distracting.

Perhaps...

[Halcyon-X]

Perhaps the fact that computers were more difficult to use compared to today's computers attributes to that. A while ago you actually had to know something to use a computer, and figure things out to get what you want done. These days people just ask someone else and then forget.

GUIs that give cryptic error messages when something DOES go wrong don't help either, since the error is represented in a much different way than people are used to when interacting with PCs. An error flashes on the screen, you have no idea why as it interrupts your work (unless you're very observant, and already know a great deal about computers), and nothing about the error message tells you what to do, in a GUI format.

There's no button for "Reconfigure option X" or "Reload driver Y" or "Open the conf file for program Z" that even gives you a hint of what's going wrong. And even when you open the conf file, you wouldn't know what to do.

Perhaps in Linux if you're in the habit of running a program from a terminal you have more of an idea of what's going on, but again, you'd have to know something about what you're doing. How obvious is this, even to a recent Windows convert? There are things that become "common sense" that everyone forgets to describe in a help manual. Troubleshooting is especially difficult if you don't know what you're doing and you're afraid of doing further damage to your PC.

These are probably the biggest roadblocks preventing users from becoming adjusted to computers and actually know what they're doing. MS recently started pimping the term "discoverable UI," perhaps this idea could be applied to error reporting and configuring in general. Instead of hiding away advanced options, or restricting configuration to editing a conf file, is there a way to make these concepts easier to understand to the end user?

Instead of "keeping users dumb through obscurity" it might be better to find ways of making things more obvious. People won't touch something if they know it breaks their PC, and they'll be less cautious in checking those options if something IS broken.

Re:Perhaps...

[Psychofreak]

I know the feeling. Windows is almost too easy.

I am a fairly recent Linux user. I have been having a lot of difficulties with the configuration of my machine. That I am running a slightly antique and non-standard configuration probably does not help. I used Linux in college so I could X-term over to the Sun workstations in the engineering lab and do my homework, but then I graduated and had little use for my computer in any manner except as a game machine. In fact it sat gathering dust and I used my wife's better, newer machine (AMD K6-2 300 w 128MB ram).

Her machine met with heat death and chips falling off the M-board. Very sad.

In any hoot I dug out my machine and started playing with it. I found that the new games wouldn't run on it (but they do on my wife's new laptop I usually never see) and that Win2k was becoming less capable of keeping up with even surfing on the internet.

Since I had my machine up and going now, I downloaded Slackware 10.0. Slackware was my choice because when I was in school, it was the choice of my classmates who played with Linux. It was also recomended by my co-workers at the helpdesk, some of whom were manageing networks for small business in the area running Red Hat, Suse, and Slackware.

Just to note I was running a P133 for most of my college and got the dual P-Pro just before graduating.

My biggest difficulty is in configuring various services for using this machine as a desktop machine with intent on software developing capacity. I do not need Apache (and successfully turned it off) or many other services that are running and eating up my seemingly precious processor clock cycles. I am finding little information on the services I SHOULD be running for MY situation. I also have a hard time learning what services that are running are doing.

This is frusterating. I am learning slowly. It took me probably 2 weeks to learn that Xorg is based on XF86 but is also a seperate fork. Both forks aparently looking at advancements the other makes to help improve both sets. I still cannot get the wheel to work on my new Logitech optical mouse!

But I am now ranting.

Since I want to re-enter the engineering field, and lack money, (due to being in sales in a less than steller economy,) I am learning skills I thought I was supposed to have been taught. I have Pascal code for Runga-Kutta, Taylor method, and probably 3 other numeric integration method. I was never taught how to do anything other than crunch numbers with a computer! To remedy this a bit I am learning ANSI C as a starting point.

Please don't devalue my choice in text but I am using C Programming in easy steps by Mike McGrath, published by Barnes & Noble. I am finding it helpful, and understandable. I am loosing interest in what I do after a bit, so I am getting only one or two pages read and worked a day. I figure I'll finish this by the new year. Maybe then I will be able to apply some of the Finite Modeling methods I studied to projects I am interested in such as boat hull design.

If any of you are working on your Linear Algebra and lack interest or understanding of application, look up FEM methods and see what it is used for. No, this is not the only use, but it is a powerful use.

Back to the Linux box. I have caused everything to crash through my own intervention as root, and even as user. I have bought some books, downloaded some server management texts, did multiple searches of the internet. The most I have learned is really from the Info files and Man pages already on my machine. I have the August '94 version of O'Reily's Unix in a nutshell (bought in '95) and 4th edition of Linux in a nutshell published in '03 (bought a few weeks ago). These do much to aid my search for answers, but are partially accountable for most of my partial system crashes (due to not having the full _spelled_out_ answer). I still am learning, and I DO get mor

Re:Perhaps...

[Fortran IV]

People won't touch something if they know it breaks their PC, and they'll be less cautious in checking those options if something IS broken.

I love optimists; they make life so entertaining for the rest of us.

One of my coworkers was not computer-illiterate; he was simply an idiot. He formatted the hard drive on his Windows ME system, knowing it would wipe it out, then emailed me (from a different machine): "I don't have an installation disk. What do I do now?"

There is too much monkey-business in most users. If it's there, they'll fiddle with it. If it isn't working the same as it did yesterday, they'll randomly change settings and then system-restore to last week.

Re:Perhaps...

[Anonymous Coward]

One of my coworkers was not computer-illiterate; he was simply an idiot.

We're talking about desktops, not workstations. If that's the case just don't give away the admin password and they can't do squat on a properly set up machine. They would not be responsible for troubleshooting anyway.

On a desktop, one often has to troubleshoot their own machine, or send it to a shop to get it fixed, in which case they have to pay for it. In both cases they must deal with the consequences, so you would assume if they knew more about what they were doing, they wouldn't even break stuff by accident (much less on purpose).

Re:Perhaps...

[Fortran IV]

We're talking about desktops, not workstations. If that's the case just don't give away the admin password and they can't do squat on a properly set up machine. They would not be responsible for troubleshooting anyway.

On a desktop, one often has to troubleshoot their own machine, or send it to a shop to get it fixed, in which case they have to pay for it. In both cases they must deal with the consequences, so you would assume if they knew more about what they were doing, they wouldn't even break stuff by accident (much less on purpose).

As it happens, the idiot in question wiped out his home machine, and emailed me for help from his office workstation. He did know what he was doing, and he broke it anyway. Frankly, I hope he had to pony up for a new OS install disk. (By the way, Windows ME doesn't have an admin password.)

correlation != causation

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because there is a correlation between computer use and poor grades, doesn't mean that the computers caused the kids to do worse in school.

Problems with computer learning

[Brained Child]

I usually have trouble retaining information I get from the internet/pdf/whatever document I'm reading. I'm one of those people who does better when they have something physical in their hands.
When I do find something online that I want to know, I usually have to save it and go back and read it several times over before it finally commits to memory. Maybe lots of children have this problem.

TV and Computers

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I know what the problem with kids today is.

PARENTS!

Parents use computers and television as a babysitter for their kids. Kick their asses in gear and get them outside, and not out to mcdonalds...

Groups like the PTC piss me off because they are trying to control televsion and not their children's viewing habits. Much like many people today, they misdirect their efforts. Why not educate parents on the use of the v-chip to control their childrens' exposure to television? Most parents don't monitor their childrens' computer usage, much like television. We can't let our children raise themselves until they are ready.

Think about the internet decency act.
Think about gun control.
Think about the PTC.
Think about the bush administration.

All of which are going about the solution in the wrong manner.
Parent your children. It can be hard, but you chose to bring them into this world.

Fock dath!

[MouseR]

Their aint no prouf.

One thing to note:

[imsabbel]

I can read TONS of "but i always used the computer and am still the brightest guy around" posts.
Sit down, and THINK!

Back when most here present started their computer use, computers werent entertainment stuff that every grandma owned. Getting into computers needed real attention, technical interest, an open mind to find out how things work, ect.
Of course, when only nerds use computers, computerusers are smart. But maybe everyone would have been smarter if he didnt spend that much time with the computer.
I certainly would.

Nowadays, most "average" users use pcs as an entertainment system, with an added value that they can fool others that they are learning/doing something useful.
And that certainly doesnt help...

The article is misleading

[Phleg]

I'm sure computers are bad for academic performance. On the other hand, as far as education? I'd say they're probably invaluable. Remeber, schooling and education are not necessarily equivalent.

Plausible.. given what I did when I was in HS

[Polarism]

From around 6th grade on, I probably did homework about half of the time, and never at home, always during class or during study halls, or i'd just half-ass it at the beginning of the day on the bus or in homeroom (where you usually spent your first 20-25 minutes of the day listening to announcements and crap).

I ended up in the low 90s for almost every year thereafter, all I really did was ace tests, turning in the occasional half-assed homework assignment that I usually scored pretty well on. Beyond that, all I did was sleep (I was awake for psychology/sociology though, and usually history if the topic didn't involve politics or religion, which bored me).

Not everyone is like that of course, and hell, the lack of motivation in HS still shines through in present life, not that it matters, i'm doing quite well for myself.

Selective motivation folks. ;)

An experience

[gagol]

As a young one man web shop entrepreneur, I must say that computer classes teached limited stuff (at least in the 90's). I remember a computer class where I learned logo. Yes, logo. How depressing... Anyway, I ask the teacher how to integrate sound with my "game". He told me it was impossible. Ten seconsd after I typed something like sound 5000 500... We all learned something in this class this day, sound was banned by the teacher who was a real douche. The best material we got was a videotape from the 70's for god sake, showing us pre 80-86 low rank yields being trashed away (computers are complicated...). For months we mainly trained typing on brand new machines... with learning dos a command an hour. I wrote my name on a computer before I draw! And yes, everybody else was completely lost, except for some jerks playing wolfenstein. Ha 1994 !

what!?

[Anonymous Coward]

they didnt hirt my lerning

Reminds me of something...

[NorthWoodsman]

"Well, it's a 'Jump to Conclusions' mat! You see, it would be this mat that you would put on the floor..."

Ice Cream

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like ice cream and murder to me.

Like this (old TV)

[Flexagon]

Start by treating the computer like old TV.

To which I would add:

Our older one is now in college with her own laptop, PDA and digital camera. She bought and installed her own firewall and virus scanner, and chose and installed OOo herself over the industry leader after running her own compatibility tests. She bought stuff online well before 18 as well. The other one is perfectly capable of using the home computer, even plays some games, but has wider interests elsewhere. Without prompting from us, she's been running her big sister's old typing program to improve her homework typing speed. Neither wasted school units on keyboarding classes merely to learn how to type; they found much more interesting electives to take.

I'm also somewhat dubious about the extent to which graphing calculators are used in some math classes. While it can increase the experimental aspect of the class, it has the potential to reduce real thought, much as the evil guess-and-check stuff they were assigned in early elementary school.

Self delusion

[3l1za]

Right but the likelihood of self delusion ("I really know this stuff.... I just didn't get that homework right nor those (the majority of) midterm problems nor...") is probably higher for those who have poor academic performance (being deluded that they really DID learn) than for those who have great academic performance (but who may or may not have "truly learned").

And straight As do not always lead to comprehension but at a tough enough program, the correlation between the two (comprehension & academic success) are going to be pretty high (not to mention that straight As generally signal someone who is willing to put in the work to learn whatever concept).

Another excuse for bad parenting :)

[Anonymous Coward]

This is just another excuse for bad parenting. If your kid has a computer, access should be limited, the computer should be in a family room, and parents should monitor what and how much they are using it. Just like TV!!!

I'm 27 years old, I have a 18 month year old daughter (shes loves to sit at the computer, and after a couple of goes, shes learned to type the keys sequentially, and not random mindless keyboard bashing) :) I'm pretty sure that limited access to the computer will help her learn her ABCs faster than not using it.

I've been using computers since I was 5 years old, and it really didn't have negative effects on my grades until I was 16. However, at that point it was a choice, school was borning, unchallenging, and computers meant I earned a few hundred $$$ a week doing coding, network troubleshooting and hardware repairs. If anything, using the computer(s), I'm pretty sure I had access to about 10 PCs at home, that includes 3 in my room. Where did it get me? Well I may not have pulled straight As, but I've never worked in a burger joint either. I've always had professional IT jobs, and I've been making 6 figures since I graduate from college. I'm about 5 years out of college now, and still most of my friends from school (who didn't have computers, and pulled much higher grades) aren't making the kind of money I was as a graduate now, 5+ years into their careers!!!

For me, computers got me ahead, and still continue to do so. I've got about 20 here at my house, and I've a nice job where I get to work from home 100% of the time doing development work, and I own my own business. How did I pull this off? I chose computers over homework since I was 16 :) Although I only played games half the time.

Back then though, you had to load EMM386, or HIMEM.SYS to get different games to work. Its a little easier these days for kids. I think though that xbox, playstation and game cube are probably much worse than PCs for kids.

Kids

[idolcrash]

Mine usually find all the good pron for me. Actually, as I don't have kids, I think (like most others here) that it is more a fact of priorities and doing what is needed to be done before playing around. I, for example, should be writing a few essays right now, but am /.'ing, farking, reading forums, listening to music, getting ready to partition a USB drive for Knoppix, and generally anything I can do to distract myself. Time to brew some cappucino.

Not quite the same

[Anonymous Coward]

Computers cost quite a bit more than magazines. You're not going to see people who can afford to buy "Monster Truck Mash-azine" owning a really nice computer to play new games and surf the 'net etc.

One word: Management

[Anonymous Coward]

B-Schools are all about learning how to multitask while keeping your neck dry.

In other words, management has never mixed well with research, creativity, or anything really worth doing well for that matter.

Correlation is not causation

[Temporal]

Some possible causalities here:

1. Computer usage makes kids dumber / perform poorly.
2. Kids who perform poorly for other reasons like to spend their time on the computer when good kids are doing homework.
3. Bad parents like to put their kids infront of a computer to occupy them rather than make them do their homework.
4. The type of families that have multiple computers (wealthy ones?) tend to be dysfunctional in ways that lead the kids to perform poorly.
5. Of the countries surveyed, computer usage happens to be more prevalent in the countries who have more conservative governments, where the economy tends to be stronger but education is underfunded, thus causing the kids to perform more poorly.

I could keep coming up with reasons all day. The article seems to assume #1 is the explanation, but the study provides no evidence to suggest that #1 is any more plausible than the others.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[Anonymous Coward]

YOU:
The type of families that have multiple computers (wealthy ones?) tend to be dysfunctional in ways that lead the kids to perform poorly.

ME:
Standby one..let me see.

486 DXsomething 100 MHZ (no turbo button!?) is a firewall router

Pent 3 350(or is it a 400?) is the work machine. It manipulates words and numbers for us. It also does this weird thing called the internet.

AMDXP2000, the HTPC/Game machine. It's got a video card w/ 128MB ram and TVin/out. It's got a ton of ram (relative to the router/firewall and work box) and just under 500GB HDD storage.

Total price for these behemoths... $800 (One TV and One Monitor not included in price.) Hell, let's throw in the Monitor, $150..that's $950 total.

Multiple machines on a non-weahtly budget. If the XP2000 didn't have the video card ($125 all by itself) and the RAM ($50) the total computer price here would be under 750$.

Granted, none of these machines were picked up new. None of the machines are configured as they were when shipped from their factories. Only the XP2000 box was paid for. The rest were being disposed of by local businesses durring upgrade cycles.

Re:Correlation is not causation

[lahvak]

Multiple machines on a non-weahtly budget. If the XP2000 didn't have the video card ($125 all by itself) and the RAM ($50) the total computer price here would be under 750$.

That's a lot of money for a familly with three kids paying for preschool, music classes etc!

Re:Hrmmm indeed

[cj171]

Here I am reading slashdot for the third time tonight, managing to avoid starting my homework for the past two hours...damn youuuu

Student Learning

[G-Mac123]

I am currently in 11th grade at a High School in Maryland. My dad is a tech addict so we have always had computers in my home. I have had a computer in my room since I was seven (with Wolfenstein 3D). I do very well in school and would hardly say I use a computer 'in moderation.' I mean, I frequent slashdot multiple times daily. I for one discredit this statement.

Also change in programming approach...

[3l1za]

Don't you think the majority of folks, especially those just starting out, "code then compile" in a loop til they can get an executable then "execute, observe, ..." instead of doing what they HAD to do X years ago which was refine the shit out of that program (expending many human cycles thinking about it, plotting a chart for it...) before their single shot at the punchcard machine (which would REALLY produce useless debugging messages).

The lure of just programming something up without actually thinking it through--completely--ahead of time especially as complexity of the project goes up and as time to do it goes down is awfully strong. I don't wish for more limited CPU cycles... just noting the tradeoffs.

No wonder...!

[bogaboga]

Yes, Slashdotters might be amazed by this.

Being a teacher here in Canada, and having a chance to teach students from all sorts of backgrounds, I find that even students from East Africa (Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania and Ethiopia) are better at maths than our own breed.

Heck, they even speak better English without slang and all those f**k and n* words!

These students do not use calculators yet they score well over 90% in these subjects. And they also complete tests in record time. We should not forget that these students come from regions where computer usage is very low, and are also "supposed" to be from the so called "Third World."

A student once told me that the integral I had put on the board had a problem. I was suprised....How did he know? It turns out that he had seen that particular format of the equation as one that SHOULD be on a particular format if it is to be solved by a human being. He was right.

These students have a good work ethic too. They take their studies very seriously. On the other hand, our own bread listen to mp3s and play games on their way to school. I have also heard some as even copying their homework.

Incidentally, the Canadian born students think they are special, and that they are better than these Africans. They still think Africa is so backward. One of these students' father told me that his son is a product of a "Third World" system, but better than any student in his class.

The best students in my class are ALL foriegn born, and come from 3rd word countries. I have since changed my view of the world, and plan to visit Uganda soon.

One should not think that these students were being put in a grade higher than where they should have been. They were simply smarter.

Re:No wonder...!

[value_added]

Years ago when I was attending grade school in Canada I could have made the same observations. Not just about East Africans, but also the Italians, Poles, Pakistanis, and any other group that were newly arrived.

Wrong..

[Turn-X Alphonse]

Using a computer in the wrong way hurts learning. If the group you talk to on IM uses "l337 sp34k", you also use it. But if all your friends (and yourself), say "NO CRAP! Plain English or fuck off!", then you get plain, clear and good English.

I admit I can't spell to save my life, and still don't know where some things need be put in setences, but I learn more from talking to Dave and Bob, in IMs then I do from watching Pop Idol version 9 million and 4!

No Shit

[psetzer]

I'm reading this during class.

A computer has effectively brought my grades up!

[Szentigrade]

First off, computers in general have been a great learning experience for me. When i was 13 i wanted a computer badly, everyone had one but me. But my parents, being, well,....parents, wouldnt buy me one. So i started to pick up everything on computers i could find and taught myself by reading computer magazines like CPU and Maximum PC how to not only build a computer, but a pretty kick ass one at that. Im still on it to this day.

Sure i was only 14 when i built my first computer, and yes i did screw up a $300 mobo and cpu combo due to static, but it was a great learning experience. Soon after i built my best friend a fairly decent computer for $300 (of course the software was pirated) and he still uses it. Im now the PC technician at the small private school i go to, and am quickly earning my 90 hours of community service hours needed to graduate. Next year, at age 17 i will be going to part time college courses to get my A+ cert. while still going to a few high school classes.

Now, you must understand that my handwritting is very poor and i hate librarys. Since i've had a computer the typing of papers alone has raised all my grades. Not to mention the huge amount of info i can grab off the internet at any given time for a paper.

Sure i play some games, and i watch movies, and listen to music, but as with anyone with a PC should know, you have time for work and time for play and you must distinguish those times with yourself or you will never get anything done.

My point is, dont blame computers for the decrease in learning skills in kids. If someone wants to do well in school he has the full potential to do so. Do you think if you took away a childs computer they would thinkn "gee, what am i to do now? I guess i'll go study for that chemistry test tomorrow." No, of course not, they would find another thing to distract themself because they simply dont care or the parents arent inforcing any good rules. What you want to learn is up to you, not the distractions around you.

I agree but to be contrary for its own sake:

[bdbolton]

" Just look at the performance of the average student in math without a calculator"

This might be because math is hard for the "average" student. Computers are definalty not a hindrance.

Perhaps it was the...

[blootooth]

Operating system they were using. : )

Theres know whey

[ccharles]

Theres know whey this be true. Wen i wuz a kid, I used thecomputer alll the time and i end up smrter then my freinds. Its gotta be rong!

Learning?

[anthony_dipierro]

Since when does academic performance have anything to do with learning?

Computer is just a tool

[q2k]

Since we homeschool, the line between playtime and schooltime is a little blurry, but computers have been used extensively for both work and play by the kids since they were old enough to operate a big trackball made for kids. They are soon to be 9 and 11 and both are several years ahead of the peers academically, and they are just fine socially. Computers are simply a part of our daily life - I doubt either of my kids can even imagine a world without computers and a PS2.

That said, I think the fact that we are homeschooling accounts for most of that, not the computers. But the computers definitely haven't hurt.

We have 4 in the house - 2 PC's in the basement schoolroom, and 2 in my home office. Also, my VoIP desk phone runs linux, so that is a 5th computer.

Re:Computer is just a tool

[man_ls]

As someone who was a victim of homeschooling myself, I wholely oppose it in any form and implementation.

Yours seem to be better than most, but my parents were the religious sort, and quite controlling in that aspect until I got older and forced them to enroll me in a public school. (This was....I dunno, 5-6 years ago. I've since graduated and moved on.)

Re:Computer is just a tool

[man_ls]

and I for some reason accidentally submitted that before I finished writing it...

computers can be a great tool, especially in a situation where they can be used effectively, and are taught by someone who knows how to use them as such (like yourself.)

She's bilingual and can feed the kittens! but...

[bdbolton]

can she get a score of 5 on /. ?

Not the computers' fault

[RAMMS EIN]

I can see how computers can degrade academic performance, but this is not the computers' fault. At worst, it's a result of how people use computers (i.e. entertainment vs. learning).

There's another side to it, too. I learn more in front of the computer than in the classroom. My knowledge and experience expand, while my grades suffer. The reason is that I'm not overly interested in writing yet another stupid Java program, learning to use yet another stupid tool, or many of the other things that university forces me to do.

So far I've gotten jobs exclusively due to my computer usage; few interviewers have so much as bothered to ask me what I've been doing in university. Academic performance is not the be all, end all of life.

Procrastionators...

[theblacksun]

...are a thriving breed, amongst I count myself member. I know many an advanced degree student who put all sorts of assignments off. They expect it, honestly. This year the computer engineering senior projects final project specification requirements (40 pages) were handed out on monday and due that friday.

I don't know why but for some reason I just can't work any other way but under the gun; without urgency I tend to just lose intrest. With literature on subjects I really want to learn about just a click away it becomes even more difficult.

Re:Procrastionators...

[Money for Nothin']

Couldn't agree more.

I have a final tomorrow morning. I should be asleep now. Instead, I'm replying to your message... :(

Re:Procrastionators...

[cruachan]

This is nothing new. See if you can find a copy EP Thompson's essay "The Making of the English Working Class" in which he talks in some depth about Saint Monday. To cut a long and elegent essay very short the thesis is that the current 5 day a week regular hours work pattern is not at all 'natural' as humans tend to work episodically for deadlines if left to their own devices. Instead the 'working week' was imposed on us, with a great deal of trouble, in the 17th, 18th and 19th Centuries so as to make labour meet the raquirements of capitalism.

Re:Procrastionators...

[The Cydonian]

See if you can find a copy EP Thompson's essay "The Making of the English Working Class" in which he talks in some depth about Saint Monday. To cut a long and elegent essay very short the thesis is that the current 5 day a week regular hours work pattern is not at all 'natural' as humans tend to work episodically for deadlines if left to their own devices.

Thanks for the pointer. My boss will shortly be receiving a book as a gift.

Re:Procrastionators...

[bplipschitz]

...are a thriving breed, amongst I count myself member. I know many an advanced degree student who put all sorts of assignments off. They expect it, honestly. This year the computer engineering senior projects final project specification requirements (40 pages) were handed out on monday and due that friday.

As computers began to overtake typewriters both at college level and at work, my stated maxim was [and still is]: the most significant contribution that computers have made to our lives is the ability to procrastinate even longer . . .

Re:Procrastionators...

[jaelle]

LOL..yer ADD, man. Classic symptoms.

Untreated ADD'ers tend to run on adrenalin, caffeine and sugar, and quite often nicotine. All stimulants.

Panic treats it quite nicely, tho the side-effects really suck.

Been there, am that.

I am a teacher

[defishguy]

I'm a highschool teacher. I teach IT and I can absolutely say that, for the most part, the more CBT that is integrated into the class the lower the level of performance by the students as a whole. I'm not saying all of them suffer, but enough do that I try to limit the contact with the machines to that of the task to be done instead of the task to be learned.

I strongly suspect that the only thing that most people learn from machines is how to be lonely..... of couse I'm sitting at one... in a room... alone...scratching.....hmmmmmm.

At any rate, the more time I spend with the students in conversation over the hum of a projector the more the students seem likely to absorb things like IRQ tables and subnetting. The kids really do seem to be more inclined to actively particpate if there is a person leading them.

Re:I am a teacher

[Anonymous Coward]

I teach IT and I can absolutely say that, for the most part, the more CBT that is integrated into the class the lower the level of performance by the students as a whole.

Well, that's only natural. Cock and Ball Torture would make me perform worse in school, too.

Re:I am a teacher

[Anonymous Coward]

Why are you teaching "IT" in highschool? Do they also teach neurosurgery and mechanical engineering? Why are we turning highschools into vocational programs? Whatever happened to biology, math, history, english and chemistry?!

Re:I am a teacher

[SoCalAndy]

Mr.McDurmott... Is that you?

Re:I am a teacher

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, *all* high schools should only teach biology, math, history, English, chemistry, etc and *never* offer any other classes that relate to fields that kids might want to go into.

Re:I am a teacher

[Airwalk]

Let me tell you, right now I am sitting in a Cisco Networking class at my high school. The teacher just finished lecturing to himself while people do homework for other classes, play games, listening to music... we all have a computer at every desk and it becomes too much of a distraction, I'll admit. I have not listened to the teacher much at all this year, unless he says something over the volume of my headphones. I know most of the stuff on the exams anyway, but I know the class as a whole does not do too well. Not like the teacher cares...

Re:I am a teacher

[defishguy]

You hit the nail RIGHT on the head. The teacher doesn't care. The first thing I did when I took over this program is drop the Cisco Network Academy. I do care and my engineers do listen. You sound to me like you WANT your teacher to make some changes. Stick it out though, I know you'll be successful!

It's a misleading headline...

[Trillan]

Let's be honest -- you are ALWAYS learning when you're doing something. The question becomes what you're learning and whether it's worth learning.

There are a lot of things you can learn on a computer that are not worth learning, but there are also a lot of things you can learn that are worth learning. However, even then, some of them serve only as a distraction to academic pursuits -- academic performance is tied to learning, but it is only a narrow field of learning. It's just one that as a society we've decided is most important to teach kids.

A more accurate headline would very likely be "Lots of distraction can lead to poor academic performance." Does this come as a shock to anyone? Skipping school to hang out at the mall also causes poor academic performance.

Maybe the tests are the problem?

[conradp]

The studies are testing performance in educational areas that used to be considered important - reading, writing, arithmatic. So clearly if the kids spend a lot of time on the computer instead of studying math or reading literature, their performance in those areas will suffer.

But what about their performance in technology-related areas? What about their programming ability, their ability to think logically, their knowledge of and familiarity with computers? Those things will surely improve, unless they're just firing up Half-Life in which case their scores will plummet just as if they had a PlayStation or an XBox. Just because their performance suffers in the traditional areas doesn't mean computers are bad for them - they may in fact be better prepared for 21st century jobs than their schoolmates who get higher grades because their parents make them study the classics and ban them from using computers...

You obviously know nothing about the CSM

[Anonymous Coward]

moron

Less emoting; more learning.

Re:You obviously know nothing about the CSM

[jwind]

please note the sarcasm...

Re:You obviously know nothing about the CSM

[Anonymous Coward]

that wasn't sarcasm, that was just stupid.

I don't think you have the slightest idea what sarcasm is.

Re:You obviously know nothing about the CSM

[jwind]

tsk tsk...Anonymous Coward. I've offended you?

Perfect Solution

[mordors9]

As an actual parent, I have the perfect solution. I just stay on the computer all the time reading slashdot. That way the kids never get to use it anyway. And now I have the perfect excuse for the wife...."I'm doing it for the children, honey"

as a certified MS and Novell instructor...

[ecalkin]

The main problem is a mistaken belief that computers can teach people. The very best learning comes from other people. There are all sorts of tools to help convey ideas and messages, such as slides, film strips, videos, computers, etc, but they are only *tools*! and computers can be wonderful tools.
If you have good instructional goals and good instructors, a computer can be an amazing tool. But when you want the computer to be the instructor, you lose interactive communications and the ability to clarify ideas. I studied the Microsoft SMS 1.2 courseware and passed the test. There was lots of places where my knowledge was sketchy, but there I went. I was later taking the class (a requirement for teaching it) I asked a question and the instructor drew a picture that helped me put almost all the pieces of the puzzle together. Boom. One display (that was not in any MS material, instructional or otherwise) and my understanding was increased 10x.

One final point is that a lot of educational programs are poorly written and poorly supported. This is very much like the poor software in other very vertical markets.

eric

Not if you took any real math

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not hard to be a no-studying ace if all you're taking are Civics, Sociology, Psychology, other "gut" courses. Try taking something hard and real, like math (upper level Calculus, e.g.) and see how well you slide by on your "natural abilities."

Re:Not if you took any real math

[Anonymous Coward]

I took lots of upper level math courses and they're all easy. Now, if you ask me to take 1st year history, I'll fail miserably -- different people are good at different things.

Re:Not if you took any real math

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not hard to be a no-studying ace if all you're taking are Civics, Sociology, Psychology, other "gut" courses. Try taking something hard and real, like math (upper level Calculus, e.g.) and see how well you slide by on your "natural abilities."

I was much the same as the poster you replied to. I did little homework and study (especially once I hit college). Basically I did the minimum work necessary to achieve a standard I was happy with (80% average), relying on my good memory, logical thinking, and being naturally good at exams. I know I did less work than a lot of the other "high achievers". The last year of high school I also did a couple of first year college papers. I got A's in both of those and the highest aggregate exam results in the school. I could have gone to college a year earlier, but didn't want to (didn't feel it would be good for me socially).

I guess you think I also took all the "soft" courses. I didn't, I did physics, chemistry, calculus, statistics, and accounting. The two college papers were calculus and statistics. It is possible to be lazy and successful. By my third year of college my grades had dropped off a bit, though I still managed first class honors for my bachelors degree in maths and computer science.

Re:Not if you took any real math

[Dr Tall]

upper level Calculus, e.g.

I would have loved to have taken two years of Calculus in high school, but they forced me to take pre-calc as a junior.

another interpretation

[iggymanz]

students who formerly wasted their time watching TV all evening now also waste time on the computer.

Umm... I haven't seen this

[agraupe]

Yes, idiots will play too many computer games if you let them. That being said, my house has 7 computers, four of which are in my room, one of which is a rather good gaming rig. And yet I have an average of over 90% in grade 10, including a 98% grade in Math 20 Pure (Grade 11 level). Obviously it doesn't hurt. Also, I have above average computer skills, and fast (70WPM) typing. Also, my game of choice, MS Flight Simulator 2004 (it's microsoft, but it doesn't have much competition), is helping me toward my future career being a pilot (my instructor said I aced an ILS approach, with full fog, on my first go on the training sim). So, where does that leave this article? Computers give people more ways to jack off and procrastinate? Duh. Does that make us more stupid? No, it merely shows the stupidity that is already there.

Re:Umm... I haven't seen this

[man_ls]

When I was in high school, I at most had 2 computers (and some other random networking equipment) in my room...and the server and switches were there because there was nowhere else for them to go, not because I really wanted them. Now I'm a CS major at Georgia Tech. (Although, I am changing schools and majors, since I despise programming at this point.)

Not to make any judgements against you or anything, but if you've got that much equipment in your room, you probably don't go out very much. That'll hurt you in the long run...I've gotten job offers from people I've only spoken with briefly, because I knew how to talk to them and work with them, not just sit and post on /..

Re:Umm... I haven't seen this

[agraupe]

Ummm... I have a linux box, which I have for daily use, a windows box for gaming. Then, I have a testing box (more educational, because I can test things out and generally screw around) and a laptop I use when I go places. I don't have them arranged in a circle, making a nice hum as I switch between them :)

TV and Computer, one each

[hwestiii]

We are so yesterday. One TV, one computer (for public use anyway) and everyone has to take turns.

There is a little cheating going on because I have my own laptop that no one else uses and a couple Linux boxes in the basement, but for all intents in purposes, there is only one of each. In addition, the TV accomodates a DVD, VCR, PS1 and GameCube in addition to regular TV programming.

I can't say what the effect is on my children's learning (also one each, girl 14 and boy 12), but they are both generally above average in their own ways.

Even so, my son still manages to tie up both TV and computer at the same time unless someone is riding heard on him.

It's true

[Anonymous Coward]

There's hardly a better cure for lack of discipline (as manifested in aimless slashdot reading) than to see the masses of morons jacking each other off.

Almost like a cold shower.

It depends on the student

[Coolnat2004]

Computers don't keep students from learning. While students have the oppurtunity to do many things at once, they need to know that they need to get their work done, and then they can play around and do whatever they please.

I, for one, am a high school student who has straight A's in all of my classes. I'm an avid computer user, but I always put aside time to do my work. Along with that, I often use the computer to learn about things that are new to me. I browse howstuffworkd.com sometimes, as well as learn about programming languages and techniques that are new to me. I am currently "studying" XHTML, XML, and PHP as I please.

You must also realize that the same problem can happen with televisions, video games, magazines, anything that can distract a student from his/her's work. Managing time efficiently is a life skill that needs to be learned, and this is just another medium to test it on.

Geeks vs. Gamers

[aldragon]

Though my computer useage does decrease my productivity at homework, I would'nt know even half of what I know, not to mention the fact that my thinking skills probably would'nt be nearly as good. The thing is that it's computer gaming that tends to cause problems, not so much as other activities. I'm not a gamer myself, and am more of a geek, and my hobbies of linux system administration, programing, and electronics are far more enlightening per a given amount of time than school.
To summerize my opinion, whether it's a problem depends on how the computer is being used, and the real problem causers are Chat junkies, and (espescially)Gamers, and not geek activities

Re:Geeks vs. Gamers

[Coolnat2004]

If you can manage your time efficiently, you can get everything done. I agree that games will greatly decrease productivity. Other computer activities such as tinkering in Linux and such can prove to make you a better student, especially when programming and comparing that to algebra.

Your spelling SUCKS. Learned from chat rooms?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most of your spelling is correct but you're using
the wrong spelling for the correct word.

You have term papers and your english is THAT poor?
Please tell me that english is NOT your first language. *sigh*

Look at it in perspective...

[The Spanish Ninja]

Naturally, we all (or most, anyway) agree that computer usage does not in and of itself cause children to have bad grades. There are many other factors in there. Television, lack of discipline, etc. However, let us not get too worked up over something posted by Christian Scientists. Very few people outside their own sect take anything they say seriously, and they have a history of...odd behaviors. For example, using prayer as a medicine and refusing to take their children to doctors when needed. This always confused me, but I'm an apathetic agnostic, so I've never understood the whole need for religion anyway. It's just not logical.

Also, think about what the internet has become over the past decade or so. Remember when it was good and pure? When you could visit any web page and not have to worry about porn popups? It is important that parents monitor what their children are doing, to an extent, but this is easily accomplished simply by helping your child with his/her research. Suggest web sites you know to contain good/accurate information and so forth. I mean, don't be overbearing about it of course, especially if you have teenagers, but just be available.

The internet in recent years has become a cesspool of pornography, stupidity, and misinformation where any idiot with five minutes can build a web site about nothing. Just look at me :) This can complicate the learning process to be certain, but it doesn't have to hinder the education of a child, or an adult for that matter. I make it a point to learn at least one new thing a day, and I usually learn several thanks to slashdot.

Multiple computers in a home, I believe, are a good idea anyway. I can't count the times when I was in school I needed to do homework or something and my mother was online playing word whomp or some other dumb game. Or one of my sisters was checking her email for the seventy-fifth time that day while chatting in at least five different chat rooms at the same time. The only person who didn't use it was my dad, and he's just now starting to use the internet. For the sole purpose of reading "news" on the politically extreme web sites he visits. Sad story.

Anyway, that's my piece. Peace.

I've had my own computer since 4th grade

[Anonymous Coward]

I've had my own computer in my room since about 4th grade... now my e-mail address ends with @mit.edu

Re:I've had my own computer since 4th grade

[Coolnat2004]

I am in a similar situation (Currently in high school, however), but it tends to be that computer geeks take most things seriously, especially schoolwork.

I smell an agenda

[inkswamp]

These kinds of studies always strike me as tainted by some political or social agenda. They never seem to match up with reality.

My daughter is 8-years-old. She has been using the computer (mostly for games) for several years. I used to sit with her and play the Jumpstart Toddler series with her when she was 2. Most of what she plays is educational, but I also let her play video games on the computer, including games on the GameCube, her GameBoy and our old N64.

So, the verdict? She's consistently ahead in school, reading and math skills are 1-2 grades ahead. She has no weak areas, no areas of concern and no behavior issues; she has a creative mind and is a whiz at problem solving and her verbal skills are remarkable at times. I couldn't ask for better. Her teachers are always happy to have conferences with my wife and me, and they have always spent the half-hour praising her and quizzing us on what we're doing at home.

I think it has less to do with the amount of time a child spends on the computer and more to do with what they're doing on it specifically. My daughter does educational stuff along with the occasional video games with no graphic violence. I also monitor what she does and help her get the most out of it. I just recently showed her the basics of how to create web pages and she's been coding her own pages by hand. No report anywhere will convince me that those kinds of activities are hurting her learning abilities.

It's just like TV. You can do it right or wrong. I don't think you can blame the computer itself.

Re:I smell an agenda

[icepick72]

Oh just wait until she becomes a teenager.

Re:I smell an agenda

[flynt]

Well if it's true for your daughter, it must be true of the general population right?

Re:I smell an agenda

[freeweed]

No more far-fetched than "if it's true for the general population, it must be true for your daughter, right?"

Re:I smell an agenda

[nysus]

The article/study didn't say kids won't excel if they use a computer. They said if you compare a kid who uses a computer from a similar background to one that doesn't, the kid who doesn't use a computer does better.

The study does suggest that in the parallel universe, the one where you don't allow your daughter to use a computer, she's doing even better intellectually.

Re:I smell an agenda

[inkswamp]

Of course not, and that's not what I said. If you read what I wrote a little more carefully (and maybe less cynically) you'll see that I'm questioning these "studies" because they so rarely seem to match up to reality. I gave my own example. I can think of many others.

I wasn't just referring to this study alone. Watch Slashdot for a couple years and you'll see occasional links to these kinds of authoritative statements about the negative impact of things like computers and video games. And yet, I can't recall a good example in my own life or circle of friends that supports any of these conclusions. I just get the sense that there is some kind of agenda behind these things. You know, it's the old Cheech and Chong, "smells like shit, looks like shit, tastes like shit... must be shit" line of reasoning.

You would think if there was anything to these studies, I would see an occasional example or two to support them in my own life. I never do.

Re:I smell an agenda

[inkswamp]

They said if you compare a kid who uses a computer from a similar background to one that doesn't, the kid who doesn't use a computer does better.

There are so many factors involved in what causes a kid to do well and to do poorly, I find it difficult to believe that they managed to isolate the effects of using a computer. For example, you can take a large sampling of kids with and without computers and find a pattern, but how do you know for certain that the computer is the cause, not an effect? What if there is a tendency amongst parents who own computers to use the computer as a diversion, to spend less time with the child and to rely on it as a TV-type "babysitter" ("Daddy's busy... go play on the computer.") You can't reasonably come to the conclusion that the computer usage is what causes it. To me, this study would be a good starting point for exploring parental involvement as a factor in a child's ability to learn and development, a much more likely cause, IMO.

The study does suggest that in the parallel universe, the one where you don't allow your daughter to use a computer, she's doing even better intellectually.

And this underscores a problem with the conclusion: that it basically cannot be tested and borders on hypothetical. You can't back up and re-raise a child without a computer to see if they do better or not. There's really no way to definitively prove this one way or the other.

Re:I smell an agenda

[inkswamp]

Oh thanks for reminding me. I'm going to sleep well tonight. =8^O

Re:I smell an agenda

[nysus]

No doubt, social science is messy. You don't have a controlled environment. And to a degree, the questions you have will determine the answers you get. And scientists also have agendas. To paraphrase yours, it seems to be: "it's the parents, stupid."

Yes, it's tough to definitively prove anything but that doesn't mean you should stop trying. I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this study unless I were qualified to and saw the hard data.

Re:I smell an agenda

[nysus]

I forgot to add the following paragraph to my last post:

"But you should not dismiss the study based on the experience of your one daughter. Question it, yes, but it's just as foolish to write it off. The best you can do is reserve judgment."

Re:I smell an agenda

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but nobody's saying that.

Re:I smell an agenda

[quisph]

I'm questioning these "studies" because they so rarely seem to match up to reality.

Reality as perceived by you. That's hardly objective. We all perceive the world as being flat, most of the time, but that proves nothing.

You would think if there was anything to these studies, I would see an occasional example or two to support them in my own life. I never do.

What exactly are you expecting to see? Even in the case of your own daughter, are you able to peer into an alternate universe to see what she MIGHT be like without computers in her life? No? Then you have no idea whether or not computers are affecting her in a positive way, a negative way, or no way. Sure, she seems to be doing fine. But you have no way of knowing how much BETTER she might (or might not) otherwise be doing. You are incapable of seeing the results because you have nothing real to compare them against. (This is the function of the control group in all of these studies which you are so quick to dismiss.)

This doesn't even address the possibility that she is simply an exception to the correlation. A correlation does not mean 100%. It doesn't even mean >50%. A statistically significant correlation could be very, very small. In other words, for a given correlation, most people could be exceptions, but that doesn't mean that it has no affect on anyone at all. The fact that YOU don't know anyone (or at least you THINK you don't know anyone) who fits the description is meaningless.

Re:I smell an agenda

[Anonymous Coward]

cunt

Fatal Overreach

[3l1za]

You totally had me on the casual nature of chat being part of chat. Abbreviations, flexibility, ... work for that medium.

But your generalization to "Language isn't meant to be a set of laws" is not supported by your earlier arguments.

The reason that language IS represented by a set of laws as if it weren't then there'd be no way to teach it in geographically disparate locations where folks may not be in contact with native speakers of that language. How can I learn Samoan if I live in SmallTown, KS? I need to refer to the laws of that language. No laws --> loss of structure --> lack of ability to communicate clearly and effectively. The laws are not there to be punitive; they are there to make the system work.

Re:Fatal Overreach

[lachlan76]

What I'm saying is that the laws need to be based more on the language as it is used, rather than using the language only as the laws allow. Otherwise you'll have a static language that can never evolve.

Other Skills

[pburger]

My little brother gets mixed grades (As, Bs and Cs) in high school and also happens to have several computers.

On the other hand, he knows how to program and is one of the _five_ best high school physics students in the United States. (He was on the physics olympiad team this past summer).

The rest of my siblings and I are similar to him, just not as extreme. (My sister and I received 800s on the GRE quantitative section).

Having computers around may not encourage the "standard" educational system, but it can help foster math/science/engineering skills.

Survey Scepticism

[mothlos]

I trust a survey of 175,000 students in 31 countries about as much as I trust the picture at the bottom of the story which says that 92% of high school students "use a PC at home for schoolwork." Did I miss something, or do many fewer than 92% of students even HAVE a PC at home?

Anybody have a link to their methods for taking and recording 175,000 surveys?

Children don't need computers

[Atroxodisse]

1. Children should never be allowed to just hop on the computer when they want. Always make them ask.

2. They shouldn't be allowed on the internet without supervision or some sort of Net Nanny type program.

3. They should be given 2 hours or less a day to use the computer unless they actually need it for school.

Thats how it works at my house.

Re:Children don't need computers

[Coolnat2004]

I can agree with this, but if computers are their "thing", they should be allowed to tinker whenever their work is done, and all of the preceding priorities are met. If they get a learning experience from tinkering on the computer, then why not let them go at it?

Re:Children don't need computers

[e r i k 0]

OK, why is that? I am valedictorian of my high school class (2007!) and I use the computer at least ~4 hours per day. I manage to make extremely high grades and yes, my English skills are more than acceptable in modern society. I believe that this phenomenon is mainly due to the fact that I've been using computers since I was around four years old. The constant unmonitored computer usage which I am allowed to do has given me an aptitude for solving problems creatively and has further developed my academic skills. Computer usage should be unmonitored - it promotes creativity and exposes people to the real world - yes, that includes the porn and other things which a mature adult needs to learn to deal with. Also, there is no reason why a child should not be allowed to just "hop on the computer when they want." Why should they have to ask to broaden their horizons?

simple...

[Rageon]

"No porn until your homework is finished."

It's not about what you use but how you use it...

[Shazow]

From blaming contraceptives for STDs and unplanned pregnancies, to straws for spitballs, to computers for distraction.

Computers are a very powerful tool in such a way that they can be used for almost whatever you might desire. Is this not a good thing?

If one desired distraction and could not find a computer, I'm sure said one would find a gaming console or a limping dog or a spot on the wall.

Computers are a tool to allow people to explore whatever it is they want to explore. Can't blame computers for allowing peoples' bad habits to show through.

Before computers, TV prevented me from doing my homework. Before TV, it was drawing and blankly staring out the window. Before windows, it was the faint light breaking through the ovum.

I know what I'm doing when I want to do it. I just don't like homework. >.

Now that I have slashdot... things are different.

Or not.

Back to homework now.

- shazow

I can believe it

[Anonymous Coward]

Where I live (outside the US; it's a small place so I won't say) the government schools started a program a few years back to encourage teachers to embrace IT and use it to benefit students. That's all well and good, except:

• The board that decides on what to implement is basically run by [major computer company], so we're blowing millions of dollars on all kinds of useless stuff. My school of a couple hundred students students has THREE - count them - high-end servers, one of which is sitting collecting dust. Another one is supposedly on the way.
• Everybody uses PowerPoint for everything. They know how to use it just well enough to be dangerous, while not well enough to protect my sanity (lots of WordArt).
• Students spend all their time competing for access to the computers so they can download pictures of rappers or kittens or PowerPets or whatever. The instant they get an assignment they rush to Google. Nobody's touched the encyclopedias since the start of the school year.
• The entire 50-PC network is part of a botnet; I don't have the expertise to fix it, and nobody is interested in doing anything to solve the problem.

So I can believe that computers are not necessarily a good thing when it comes to education.

Yeah!

[Jim_Callahan]

Then again, I doubt that the grades are going to go UP when the worlds children are universally trained never to use proper nouns, quotation marks, or numeral characters.

Come on, i'm sure you've at least once used a spellchecker on default settings. Ick.

How do I respond?

[Roguelazer]

I respond that the survey blatantly contradicts what I've seen in the real world and is thus worthless. Thank you for asking.

Tough love

[Dark Bard]

I find super gluing their fingers to the keyboard helps promote computer use.

My next counter argument...

[Anonymous Coward]

Then I would move to this line of attack: you took upper level (+ a couple years worth) of Calculus and from a noted institution -- important only because I've found that courses are more difficult at more competitive schools (b/c the students are by and large better)?

I know several Math PhDs at very, very good schools who by no means think their work is "easy." So either you're not working at the level they are (course level or course difficulty/quality) or you are the very rare super genius (cuz these folks are BRIGHT like top .02% bright).

There is no greater proof of this...

[Anonymous Coward]

than slashdot.

What worked for Bi-lingual daughter?

[kvsnut]

My children are younger and our rules are similar although we (my wife mostly) are somewhat flexible.

How did you raise a bi-lingual daughter? With my limited knowledge of spanish and videos http://www.early-advantage.com/about_muzzy/ I'm trying to raise my three to be bi-lingual (if not multi-lingual. Perhaps russian after Spanish.

Re:What worked for Bi-lingual daughter?

[Ralph Spoilsport]

We send her to a French School. Her week is 80% French and 20% English.

The only way to really learn another language is through immersion. Since English has a German-like structure, we wanted her to get a Romance Language knowledge, so she could then go to other languages in Europe with ease (From French to Spanish and Italian, from English over to German or dutch).

It's really important to learn another language, especially as the Empire collapses - it'll be a distinct survival skill to be able to speak diffreent languages.

So I suggest get your kids into an immersion program. The School we have our daughter in prevents us from having significant vacations, or a bigger house, or nice cars, or much of anything, really (it's HEINOUSLY expensive - $15k a year) but she's worth it.

RS

Re:What worked for Bi-lingual daughter?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a pity Europe still fades into oblivion at the eastward of the Austrian border...

Re:What worked for Bi-lingual daughter?

[ghamerly]

I'm curious where you found such a school. What city do you live in, if you don't mind me asking? I am presuming here that you live in the USA, but I could of course be wrong.

Re:What worked for Bi-lingual daughter?

[mailman-zero]

I am majoring in Computational Linguistics. I recently came across an interesting article involving language acquisition. It talks about academic research and conclusions and then gives practical ways to overcome hinderances to learning a language or helping someone else learn a language other than those that are spoken natively in one's country.

The basic assumption is that children don't necesarilly learn languages more easily than adults. Most studies compare children learning a first language to adults learning a second language. It turns out that most children take at least ten years to master their mother tongue. Most adults in a completely foreign nation without any way to fall back on their mother tongue will have better mastery of the second language in seven years than most ten year old children do of their first.

According to the article it's very difficult to "encourage" a child to retain a language unless they have a close friend or a relative with whom they interact often that is not able to understand them otherwise. Once the child finds out that Dad speaks English to everyone else it all falls apart. That said, it's not impossible, just extremely difficult.

Re:What worked for Bi-lingual daughter?

[lahvak]

It's a pity Europe still fades into oblivion at the eastward of the Austrian border...

You mean northward? :)

Re:What worked for Bi-lingual daughter?

[Ralph Spoilsport]

i live in San Francisco.

There are several immersion programs in public schools here, and several private. In terms of French Schools, there's the French American International School, and the Lycee Laperouse. Downthe peninsula there is a German school.

this page has links to a bunch of language schools.

RS

limited use

[Anonymous Coward]

My parents limited my computer programming / video gaming to two hours a day when I was growing up. I managed to get good grades in HS, excel in college, and now I'm finishing up my computer science PhD in multiagent systems.

this doesn't apply

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm a student in secondary school, have 5 computers in the house (no macs, or anything more than 3 years old) and have a high GPA (3.86 or 94.2% average). I play Halo on a daily basis, am planning on getting CS soon, and am taking three honours classes and one AP class.

Re:It's not about what you use but how you use it.

[Coolnat2004]

Exactly.

I'm an EE type.

[Polarism]

I was done with math in 10th grade, and I said screw calculus, didn't need it.

Besides, just simply taking a course on anything doesn't mean you're learning anything. You seem to place too high a value on that.

I'm naturally gifted with math, it's my strongest subject by miles and miles, but I really don't like it that much. Love/Hate thing. Calculus was a joke in our system anyway, you're not teaching anyone anything when ~75% of the class is failing every major test and everything has to be graded on a bell curve.

Least, that's how it was with our school system, perhaps yours infuses lessons into your brains via the matrix.

At least...

[Jim_Callahan]

THESE distracted children learned how to read. Remember back in the day when the main thing distracting kids was football (either kind)?




....Not that I'm saying I have a thing against this nation's janitors and lifetime walmart cashiers. I suppose somebody is taking care of it, and it isn't me.

Well, it just goes to show...

[tyler_larson]

...that whatever you want to prove, you can find a study to back up your claim.

It's the parents, not the computers!

[rlgines]

If computers are treated as the baby sitters, then I could see where the article is correct.

We have 9 computers in our household. My oldest daughter who is in highschool just scored in the 98th percentile on a standardized test, my second daughter scores straight A's, my youngest son in first grade is doing well in school (grades are kinda worthless at that age level).

They are all accomplished musicians for their ages, they have multiple interests, they all read (sometimes four or five books at once), my girls compete in Bible quizzing competitions through our church denomination and usually finish 'in the money' at the national competitions, they each have their own chores to take care of around the house and they are very well mannered (in public and private).

And yes we enjoy playing networked games where the five of us beat up on each other at times (AOE and bzflag are the household favs).

It's not the computers that are at fault. It is the parents and the structure laid down in the home that makes the difference.

Just my two cents worth.

Just what I was thinking

[bLindmOnkey]

I'm in school now, and there are currently five computers in the house. I find that distraction occurs when some idea or thought pops up in my mind that tells me "you MUST find out about that NOW" and "it will only take 5 minutes". Of course I give in, but then I find myself checking /. then IGN and every other computer related site that comes to mind.

The internet is like a drug. Once you pop the fun don't stop. It's my source of knoledge, my wise old man, mi cumpanero, my escape. However, 5 some odd years later of this bad habit and my parents wondering why my grades are so inconsistent, I, a high school student, make a very decent income teaching old people how to use just about every piece of software out there, and am able to answer just about any (unfortunately) windoze hardware and software related question from friends, family, etc. My field of expertise is based on the internet, but internet time is the only way.

In fact, I write this comment now just after stopping in the middle of my calc homework to see what the lastest news on /. is. Many lost hours and days of my life have been gone into internet use, and an outcome for me has been bad grades sometimes, but I believe knowledge is power and since the internet is a never-ending or infinate source of knowedge I will never stop using the internet to gain knowledge-carefully.

Then maybe you went to an easy school?

[Anonymous Coward]

With an 80% average, you probably went somewhere middling for college (not that there's anything wrong with that...), which means that your competition in your classes (most of which I presume were graded on a curve) was less severe (than it would be at a top university, generally speaking).

It's important for us to have a realistic view of our abilities. It's also important to realize that the difference between a "B" and an "A" is usually pretty significant (more folks can get a B than could get an A, for starters). So "being close" doesn't buy you much.

I am not saying that folks don't have different ability levels (of course they do); I am saying that there is something more difficult in excelling at hard subjects than excelling in soft subjects (where for "soft" subjects, grading is often much more subjective).

Re:Then maybe you went to an easy school?

[Anonymous Coward]

With an 80% average, you probably went somewhere middling for college (not that there's anything wrong with that...), which means that your competition in your classes (most of which I presume were graded on a curve) was less severe (than it would be at a top university, generally speaking).

You're right, though actually I'm not in the US, so I have no idea how it compares. I expect the competition was nowhere near as tough as a top US school. I think you're focusing on college a bit much in this discussion. We're really talking highschool, any highschool. You (assuming you're the same person that wrote this comment), made a blanket statement about not being able to cruise in "tough" subjects. I'm just saying I did so in my environment.

It's important for us to have a realistic view of our abilities. It's also important to realize that the difference between a "B" and an "A" is usually pretty significant (more folks can get a B than could get an A, for starters). So "being close" doesn't buy you much.

Ok, here's a realistic view of my abilities. I think I was in the top 100 students of my year in maths and science nationally. I'm basing this on my results in the maths and science competitons I did in highschool (generally to avoid class and occassionally win some cash, I might add), and my participation in programs to select my countries teams for the International Chemistry Olympiad and International Mathematics Olympiad. Incidentally the competition was much tougher for the maths team. I think the gap between the real geniuses and everyone else is much more pronounced in maths than chem, and there seem to be more people who excel in maths (to the exclusion of other subjects). I'm more of an all-rounder.

I am saying that there is something more difficult in excelling at hard subjects than excelling in soft subjects (where for "soft" subjects, grading is often much more subjective).

I think it very much depends on the person. Some people find maths in particular easy to understand: it's all logical and makes sense. A lot of the "soft" subjects are very subjective. To score well you need to parrot back the arbitrary party line, and at the same time show that you're thinking about the material (I'm exaggerating somewhat). That can be more difficult for people than just understanding tensors or whatever. I'm speaking from experience here - I took a paper on the philosophy of science and fucked up the exam (still passed though).

too many __________ hurt learning

[FLOOBYDUST]

Sometimes I wonder about the articles posted here. It is painfully obvious (at least to me) that headlines such as "Too many ______ is harmful for children"" are becoming too common these days. Too much of anything (yes \. ers even that) is harmful to everyone, children included. But being the geeks that we are and remembering Miss Quinn's 4th grade class dissecting sentences lets try this: Too many computers; Does this mean too many computers that are running or too many just sitting around doing nothing. I believe it is the former and not the latter. So what are these computers doing?? My guess is they are not writing assembly code for x86 CPU's.... Good bet is using IM, cruising mindless blogs, or any of the other 123^34555 things that you can do to waste time with a computer.. Harmful to children: Does it cause uncontrolled vomiting or keep us from doing what we should be doing, like homework? probably the latter. Soo Miss Quinn would have us rewrite he sentence; Too much wasting time keeps children from doing their homework " Now having fixed the sentence we turn to her for approval......... AND SHE GLARES AT US ACROSS THE DECADES OF TIME AND SCREAMS " TELL ME SOMETHING I DON"T ALREADY KNOW"

Popups on Slashdot?

[zoid.com]

Am I the only one that is getting intercasino popups on slashdot? I get them on 2 different systems. I've run all of the spybot and adaware like tools that I can think of but I still get them (only on slashdot). What's going on?

My kids are doomed.....

[Anonymous Freak]

Let's see, at last count there were 35 'general purpose' computers in the house, plus 5 TVs (not as bad as my parents' house's 8 TVs, including one in each bathroom, though;) and numerous other small interactive computing devices (GameBoys and such.)

However, my (10 year old) son is limited to 1 hour of non-educational TV a day (including video games,) or non-educational computer use a day, plus two more hours of 'optional' educational use. (So, for example, 'educational' cartoons count as extra, but doing actual homework does not count against this limit.) Doing real mind-stressing things like playing his violin (hey, he chose the instrument,) playing chess, doing homework, or reading 'real' books (not comic books,) earns him more time on a 2-for-1 basis. (Two hours of reading equals one hour of TV.)

And I try to limit (but not outright prohibit) less savory material (The Simpsons,) through 'lead by example'. Downright offensive material (South Park) is prohibited, though. (And I love both cartoons, so I have to wait until the kids are in bed to watch them in secret. :-) Same with playing my Castle Wolfenstein and Doom3.)

Finally, no TV or computer in bedrooms. Only in public places, where a parent's watchful eye can wander by at any moment. I have very lax filtering on the computer, basically to prevent the EXTREME hard core material that comes up when you click on the wrong search result, or typo a website address just wrong. But other than that, the rule is that he can go to whatever websites he wants, as long as he's comfortable viewing them with my wife and I standing right behind him. If we come by, and a windows closes or gets minimized just as we approach, it's an immediate 1-day ban from the computer for attempted deception. Same with the TV. If the channel changes suddenly when we enter the room, it's 'LAST CHANNEL' button time, and if it's not innocent channel surfing, no TV for a day.

Luckily, these rules haven't had to be enforced yet, as he's only 10. But I know other parents of slightly older kids who have had to enforce them regularly. I figure it's good to have them in place early. (I also have a 3 month old, so it'll be awhile until she's going to need any of this.)

The best solution for the 'too many computers hurts learning'? Teach as if the computers aren't there, only using them as higher-tech tools in place of older, klunkier ones. (Wikipaedia vs. Encyclopedias, for example.) Don't use them just to use them. (Teaching basic addition using a calculator. Math GAMES, fine. But using a calculator for basic problems? BAD!)

No "EE type" that I know...

[Anonymous Coward]

...could major in Electrical Engineering (that's what you mean by EE, right?) without having at least two years (4 semesters) of college calculus.

How can you say that you're "naturally gifted" in math when you haven't even taken any courses in what's considered a BASIC branch of it (Calculus)?

It's one thing to say you're strong in Math if you've taken 2-3 years of it at a college level (not including stats!) and excelled; but anything short of that seems to be an assertion w/o its corresponding proof.

And, no, taking a course in X doesn't mean you've learned X; but taking a course in X and excelling in it (if you didn't cheat! and if the course was sufficiently challenging) does suggest that you at one point knew some of the basics of it.

Hah

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm In my mid teens, There are 8 computers and a PS2 Connected to the internet in my house. MY GPA LAST GRADING PERIOD WAS 3.57!!!

I don't recall sending you transcripts of any

[Polarism]

courses i've attended. :)

Of course, that doesn't matter right? You're just here to try to shove an agenda down my throat, or at least look good trying to do it.

Goodnight sir.

Or maybe some folks learn to type....

[ebyrob]

What's in they're mind as though their speaking, like a good righter should, and then don't bother to proofread the friggin slashdot post because it really isn't worth teh effrot when you come to think of it.

Back when I was in high-school our teachers were always trying to get us to write more like we spoke. Not less.

depends on what they get used for

[jpellino]

"too many computers hurt learning" is an irresponsible, oversimplified conclusion, title, banner. etc...

it's how they're used

there's a big difference between

a kid who plants themselves in front of games, game sites, and endless web pages that don't move about cartoons that do with little or no parental supervision

and

kids who have lots of access to computers and use them to research and bolster their learning, create music, art, writing, movies, projects, web sites, etc... with a good guide on the side to make sure they're making progress

I can't speak for everyone...

[rub1k]

But I'm in my senior year of HS, and I'm looking at graduating third in my class of over six-hundred students. We have four computers in our house: two that run Linux exclusively, one running Win 2000, and my computer, which dual boots between Gentoo Linux and Win XP, all of which we have built ourselves from parts from a local electronics store. If you're gonna worry about your grades, you're gonna worry about your grades. I don't think having a few PC's laying around (or Xbox, PS2, et. al) will hinder anyone who is determined. If you're gonna not do your work, then you probably don't need PC's to distract you anyway ;-) I will say that having to read through manuals and find my own answers to my questions when I was starting out with Slackware Linux helped a LOT when I took AP Biology, if only because I was already used to looking up answers for myself rather than relying on others. -Doug

What about biological limitations?

[blahplusplus]

Why do people think all kids have the same potential? They don't, no matter how hard you try to educate some kids, they have hard "hardware limits" just like if you were trying to run Windows XP on a 486 33mhz with 8MB of ram.

This is why there are psychological and intelligence tests to test performance of intelligence, speed, memory and overall ability.

Lets face facts, even if everyone could be a genius that doesn't mean there are enough seats for all the jobs people would like to do. In any system of things all things being equal there will always be someone that "loses out" even when they succeed.

Mod parent up!

[Anonymous Coward]

Man, you're the best.

Sorry come again?

[McNihil]

What complete and utter BS. I had more than one computer when I was very young... but then again I didn't play games on them. I tried to learn new stuff. Thats right using the computer as a tool not as RECREATION!

Oxymoron?

[kuzb]

Christian Science Monitor

I shudder any time the words "Christian" and "Science" are used in the same term.

I own two computers and I'm only 16.

[darkgoat]

Yeah i'm one of those people with 2 computers in my room and 4 in the house, and about a 90% average in my grade 12 year(I'm taking Math Principles, Physics, English, And Chemistry). I also own a modded xbox, which is also in my room. To get this stuff I had to work as a dishwasher for a year. This is enough to show that computers effect nothing in life. I've been doing well in school since a little kid and also had a computer since then(Old Pentium 60 :)). It's up to the child to accept to work on his education, and not the parent. I can adgree that I do get distracted when working on computers, that's why I don't use them to do most of my school work. Maybe i'm not suffering because I only have dialup, but you never know.

Yes but...

[3l1za]

What do you mean by language evolving exactly?

If you mean adding in new words (e.g. "blog"), then of course that's already built in and happens.

If you mean changing the way that basic grammar rules work, I'd think that'd be a mistake.

If you've read any Shakespeare (which I'm sure you have), you'd see that the English language has adapted since then (mostly in common word choice -- we see fewer of these: doth, 'tis, o'er, hath, etc.).

But that leads us to one of the reasons that it's important that we don't change the structure too much: all of the English written works developed for the past 800 years or so are more or less accessible to those who know proper English. If we changed dramatically the structure, either newbies would have to learn BOTH structures OR those works would be less accessible to them than they are to people trained in standard English.

It's no different than one router deciding that it wanted to do TCP a little bit differently; he can't do that. Not really anyway. Not if he's connected to all X other routers who understand the standard implementation of BGP, TCP, IP, ...

Re:Yes but...

[lachlan76]

IM isn't that different all that different to notmal English.

My point is, it works. The whole point of language is to get the idea across.

It's no different than one router deciding that it wanted to do TCP a little bit differently; he can't do that. Not really anyway. Not if he's connected to all X other routers who understand the standard implementation of BGP, TCP, IP, ...

If the other routers can still understand it, and learn to use that new TCP version, then it can.

Re:Yes but...

[yakovlev]

Ahhh, but we have changed the English language since Shakespeare's time. We have completely removed the farmiliar second person verb form.

The reason you don't see "thou hast" anymore is that this verb form is now archaic. The only reason you recognize and understand this verb form is from reading Shakespeare or other literature from that time period. Modern students are no longer trained in this verb form, and there is a good chance that if you tried you would use it incorrectly (not to mention that more modern verbs would not have a correct conjugation.)

<insert on-topic part of post>
This is similar to why having a computer require correct grammar is a problem. It would probably flag more modern forms of lanugage (not to mention technical jargon) incorrectly. What would be good is to run a spell and grammar check on the IM client after they have been sent. That way people's grammar will be checked and they can learn from the interaction with the checker, but still use incorrect grammar when appropriate.
</on-topic>

ghetto moderation

[Clover_Kicker]

I agree with this post!

The Problem is...

[Anonymous Coward]

...this is coming from this Christian Science Monitor, which is neither Christian nor Scientific.

Same effect as wealth....

[jwhite2004]

Computers have the same effect as wealth on children. As I understand it, the end economic product of wealthy children is polarized, more so than middle class or poor children. They are more likely to either do very well or do very poorly and live off their parents.

The effect is the same with computers. It leads students to either waste away their lives and brains in front of them, or, if a good student, they can use the computer as an additional tool to help them excel.

I spent hours every day in front of the computer in high school, and I had perfect grades (4.000) and excellent ACT and SAT scores. If anything, they helped me through my education rather than hindered me in any way.

Again, you have too much emphasis on "school"

[Polarism]

If someone wants to learn a given discipline, whatever it might be, they'll be learning 100000% more when they take initiative to really learn it on their own, rather than through a ficticiously subjective course path that only usually provides some of the answers (that fit in line with the agenda of that College).

The only real way to learn math related material anyway is by actually getting your hands dirty, and applying it to real-world stuff. Everything else is just a test-lab, mostly useless beyond some core concepts which someone is either going to pick up, or not. Sorry to say, but generally people only learn things they have aptitude for. I can sit here all day long teaching you addition/subtraction, but if your mind just isn't at a level to learn it, you aren't going to learn it.

I've come to realize that "College" is just like a permission slip to your new boss saying you're authorized a little bit more pay, and perhaps a little more clout in obtaining the job you're after. Academics.. are for those who seek to learn, instead of treadmill it up.

Birds

[syphax]

My 2-year-old twins listen to bird calls on the computer, and that's about it.

Then, they fight in the car about who's the barred owl, and who's the saw-whet.

Age

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems very likely that at age 7 when children are still looking to their parents for nearly everything that such rules work I highly doubt that as she grows older and more aware of the world around her that your methodology will be as effective.

More than likely she might rebel against your admittedly stern authority as she grows older. Also as she grows older and is exposed to more things she will realize that the lifestyle that she has been exposed to is radical different than others. At the very least she might begin to question why you chose to raise her in that fashion or more likely use it as a further excuse to rebel.

I'm going to stop here with my little dime store analysis of what I see you doing but I hope you take some time to realize that your raising a human being, not something for you to try and pour into what you see as the perfect mold.

Re:Age

[Ralph Spoilsport]

I completely agree with you on much of what you say. We have some rules that we keep a pretty tight lid on, and it allows us all to peacefully co-exist and spend time together as a family. (I'm typing this because she's having a bath right now, so it's "mommy time")

In most other ways, we're very liberal parents who want her to explore things that interest her. It's very likely that once broadcast goes HD, we won't upgrade - we'll get a projector, and then the only thing she can watch will be stuff she rents or borrows from school, the library, or friends. And it'll look GREAT.

But computer games are not something "we do", and frankly, she's shown very little interest in them. She'd truly rather use her imagination creating little worlds of her own, (today it was her orange froggy was going to marry Barbie, but the giant Clifford Dog came and mesed up the wedding, so the unicorns came and took them to the secret castle (aka her bedspread) so they could meet the Wonderful WItch played by another Barbie.

Frankly, I think that's a much better use of her time than twiddling dials in someone else's imagined world, and we encourge her imagination and critical thinking skills.

RS

Re:Age

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like you give her a lot to do and call it letting her use her imagination.

Re:Age

[Fancia]

Well, games can be as books for working up one's own imagination. I'm an (aspiring) author, and I've taken quite an interest in game narrative as an art form, which I certainly wouldn't have if I hadn't much experience with the medium.

Re:Age

[flahavin]

Doesn't sound very liberal to me.... With all the seals...what is there to explore Wait till she gets to the age where they all wanna dress like whores, whats your plan for that?

Yep

[Anonymous Coward]

I see "Elizabeth Spoilsport, porn starlet" in her future.

Yup... and I can guess which one

[Jaime2]

In most wealthy countries, computer ownership is higher than poorer ones. In most poor countries, lower performing children are taken out of the school system and put into trade schools or institutions at a very young age, raising their overall average. Hence, places like the US seems to have dumber kids than much of the rest of the world. Result: correlation between more computers and poor grades.

If only I knew then what I know now

[Daytona89]

...my /. reading would have gone down, and my grades would have gone up.

How about this?

[Anonymous Coward]

With more than one computer both the parent and the child will not have to fight over computer time. They both use their own computer, hours and hours on end. Unchecked, both of them get absorbed into their own mindless net activities(pick your poison.) Both brains rot and the child gets bad grades while the parent gets bad performance reviews.

Student's View

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm in school now and I believe multitasking is a good thing. In a one hour time by multitasking in class I can get all the notes and finish studying/reading for the next class. This is good -- it saves time, and I'm able to maintain my 3.8 status with honors.

Using the computer to multitask is good too. There is no reason to spend an hour on a paper and an hour talking to friends via IM when you can do it all during 1 hour and 20 minutes. Also, IM is useful when doing papers/homework so people can work together and collaborate.

My parents know that I do my homework on the computer, and they know that I use it for "entertainment." There is nothing wrong with playing some Counter-Strike on a school night, as long as you can understand that that won't be a good excuse when you say "Sorry Mrs. Teachme, I forgot my essay."

Kids just need to get their priorities straight when the multitask. My top priority now is working on an essay. It's done, and I'm letting it sit a bit before proofreading it again. In the meantime, I'm IMing and typing this message. Notice that I don't use the "l8r l33t /.ers" lingo, despite having 4 IM windows open.

Computer usage makes kids dumber / perform poorly

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes and No.

Game playing most not correctly selected reduces understanding and knollage. Ie lot of games have a lot of infomation that has to be known. Without it they will not win game ie brain can only takin so much in one day ie learning to play game and learning knollage come out of the same section.

Wordprocessing(skill improvement) Remember to have some stuff done with out spell checker so english skills are not lost.

Programming ie kids want to play games having to type them in compile them. And start cheating ie adding cheats. Kids have now learnt to code and starting down the path to a game programmer.

Doing Homework. Sorry to disappont everyone I did better in Maths and Physics than anyother subject. Teacher did not set homework at all. Ie all the ones Teachers set homework I did worse. It was the class average not just me.

Reason doing the work with teacher there any questions could be answered correctly. Note only homework ever set by him was reading once a week.

Half and hour of correct user is better than 4 hours of stuffing it up. Ie the longer you do a task wrong the harder it will be to fix.

My emphasis on school comes from...

[Anonymous Coward]

the fact (fact!) that it is a bullshit detector. That is, you can THINK you know x,y,z but until you've actually studied it in some concentrated, structured fashion and proven that you understand it at a variety of levels, you may be FOOLING yourself.

Of course you can excel in some school subject and still actually not know that topic very well (this is pretty uncommon, though). And that's where going to GOOD schools is helpful; there you (generally) are surrounded by very bright, tough professors and competitive classmates. This allows you to get a more honest view of your aptitudes. And maybe even forces you to learn something you "basically get" very, very well, intead.

when they take initiative to really learn it on their own, rather than through a ficticiously subjective course path

You seem to take a dim view of formal education in general. You also seem to think these two properties are mutually exclusive: { studying a subject as part of a course } and { really learning it }. This disjointness may exist in the schools you've learned but it's in no way inherent. In fact, the contrary.

Of course formal education is by no means the only way to achieving aptitude. It is, however, a highly proven way. With much more empirical evidence than, say, your-favorite method.

Well duh!

[blitz487]

In other news, kids who are driven to school are less physically fit.

Good luck...

[3l1za]

getting your ideas respected and understood throughout the ages if you write like this:

gr8 r u goin 2do ...

It may work in chat (this, I never disputed and in fact reinforced) but it does not work in general.

Look at Phrack papers: many of the authors of those are probably not native English speakers and/or are chat officianados and, yet, when you read their Phrack papers, they are by and large intelligently and clearly written. Most folks get this: writing clearly and correctly increases your chances of getting your ideas heard and of folks being able to understand and digest them (without breaking out a lineaer B table) in ages hence.

Not me...

[Anonymous Coward]

I know I've probably been beaten, but here's my story:

I have 2 computers in my room (Debian sarge as a server, debian sid as a workstation), as well as a POS laptop I don't use anymore (Win98SE because linux wouldn't install). I also have a nice shiny new laptop (WinXP because I use it for school). So that's 3 computers that I use on a regular basis that are mine alone, and my family has another 2 as well.

As of the end of my sophmore year of high school, I was ranked 2nd out of 416, and had a 4.666 GPA on a 4.0 scale.

Computers help me learn.... this study is bull.

So, it's math and reading?

[Joe Tie.]

I can't say I'm too surprised. I imagine that if I had a calculator around me for large chunks of my time as a kid my math would have suffered when it was taken away as well. I also have to wonder if the kids would have done better on the reading exams if it'd been done with the medium they used most for reading, a brightly lit screen instead of paper. I read most of my novels on a backlit PDA, and I wouldn't be at all surprised to find myself scored lower reading from paper at this point. No more than I'd be surprised to find the reverse from someone who only had brief exposure to reading from backlit screens.

A huge counter-example

[whiplashx]

I was not allowed to play video games or watch tv for more than an hour a day when I was under my parents care. I was not allowed to go to concerts or parties, and my parents were strict about what I did with my time. They did encourage schoolwork, and I did very well. But at the same time I had aggression issues and social problems. I was unable to understand the "average" kids and as a result I was socially inept all through high school. I fought the kids who picked on me. Also, a large part of my behaviour problem was that I would "sneak" video games and movies that I wasn't allowed to see. University, and seperation from these rules, have made me better. I have more friends, less stress, and I am still getting excellent grades. I'm a computer programmer, interning at a computer game company. The stupid thing is, I can see my mother is doing the same thing to my brother, and I can't do a damn thing about it. -Thomas

Re:A huge counter-example

[whiplashx]

By the way, is there a way to edit a previous post?

I haven't done HTML in a while and I forgot to use my tags ;)

Re:A huge counter-example

[Anonymous Coward]

Great post. Don't worry about the lack of line breaks... at least it's not 18 sentences long (THOSE are the ones where not having the linebreaks kill you).

You will be of help to your brother even though you don't have much ability to change his current situation... because he can see that you got out of it, are doing well, you can show him the path, etc.

Keep up the good work!

Re:A huge counter-example

[EEBaum]

I'd say it's the strictness about time and activity, rather than the specific lack of video games or TV, that had the greater effect.

What are they saying?

[liam kincaid]

I agree with inkswamp that computers can be beneficial to the student.

It is just a matter of priorities...there should be balance of gaming and serious work/school stuff. If the kids are left in fornt of the computer, what would you think happen? Of course they'll get the urge to game to their hearts content.

The report is a little to eager in stating that many computers in one home causes poor performance in students.

I say that it is a case to case basis. We have three computers at home and it seems that most of us are consistently getting high grades (we are 10 siblings). It is because we and our parents have set rules governing the use of the computers. Rules such as serious school/work stuff should supercede people playing games and games can only be played during weekends.

I was talking about college!

[Anonymous Coward]

Easy there, tough guy... :)

Re:I was talking about college!

[Dr Tall]

Oh, sorry, I thought you were talking about a high school schedule.

The more things change...

[erichnewell]

I'm a little surprised this has ruffled anyone's feathers, let alone made any worthwhile banter here.

First there was [insert arbitrary invention here] and it was CERTAIN to ruin students motivation / abilty to learn [insert aribitrary academic subject here]. Then there was that follow up thing...and the other...

Anyone on here remember when programable calculators came out? Gameboys? The typewriter?

Each of these were the harbingers of doom in one form or another. Yet somehow we still seem to produce slews of creative, intelligent, motivated, and productive members of society.

To throw in another cliche: The only constant is change.

Society is becoming more complex, the available history more vast, and in is always increasing at an advancing rate.

So don't be alarmed, if your children aren't a whiz with the dewey decimal system and their cursive stinks. If they can program in C, google more effectively than you, and type faster than most adults think, then they are more than prepared for pursuing their fortunes in the 21st century.

You see, your education is what you make of it. Always has been. Always will be. The parents can help a little here and there; but a good student will grow at an even more rapid pace with the tools we have available.

All that has transpired is that the untalented, unmotivated, and uninterested can skate by just a little bit easier.

If, on the other hand, you want to speak about their bodily health and fat arses....well, we'll leave that for another thread.

$0.02

The funniest part

[Soulfader]

...is at the end.

"There's this sort of bizarre belief that computers cast a spell over students and teachers and schools," says Christopher Dede, professor of learning technologies at the Harvard School of Education. "Can you imagine what would happen if you had the same in business, asking if computers were interfering with performance? It would be a big joke."

Now is it a joke because it's funny, or a joke because it's true?

Time Limits

[ashitaka]

At an XP Command Prompt:

NET USER TIMMY /TIMES:Sun-Sat;18:00-21:00

And NEVER let a kid have a PC in their own room!

For the record...

[Anonymous Coward]

I *do* believe that you're bright.

Re:For the record...

[Anonymous Coward]

Bright enough but lazy, and there are plenty brighter. The top people in maths (in my year, nationally) are well me in ability. Still I think I could have managed an 85-90% average (maybe even better) at college if I tried, but I just couldn't see the effort required as being worthwhile. I'd rather have the more relaxed lifestyle. And now looking back 5 years or so later, I can see that while those sorts of grades would have been a good achievement in themselves, they wouldn't have made any difference in terms of my career (unless I'd decided to do the PhD).

Give me a break

[sdanis]

I've got 2 kids in college now. One was salutatorian of his high school class. He started using my computers when he was 2. I've always had more than 3 computers in the house, and they each had their own early on. Both of my boys earned good grades throughout school. They understood our priorities because my wife and I were very clear about them.

The problem isn't too many computers, it's parents who don't understand, control or care about what their kids are doing on the computer. A computer isn't a substitute for helping your kids with their homework. (Just like TV isn't a substitute for parental supervision)

You have to control their IM time, their game time and their general "screwing around on the computer" time. If learning, homework and grades aren't a priority with the parent, how can they be a priority with the children?

And I'm not talking about parental fascism either. Things need to be balanced and prioritized. And you can't make your kids do anything - you have to get them to understand what's in their best interests. (Although I've found that fear, guilt and outright manipulation are tools that no parent should be without!)

Geez, I'm so sick of people pointing a finger at technology as being a bad thing or a good thing. Technology, for the most part, is amoral. It's up to the people who use it to either do something good or bad with it. [Okay, flame off]

I guess I'm turning into a cranky old man ;-).
(And, crap, they both read slashdot so I'll probably get a ton of flak from them!)

Computers Okay if They are Delayed

[dozek]

As a freshman computer science major in a required writing class, I wrote an essay suggesting that premature introduction of computer technology could lead to severe developmental progress. One of my primary arguments was that the development of fine motor skills and handwriting was stumped when children are allowed to type and use the mouse rather than write, paint, etc.

Further, (and granted, this was prior to the widespread advent of the WWW) the 'curiosity driven' learning experience is interrupted by the immediacy of technology provided information. Case in point, Online Encyclopedia vs. Book Encyclopedia. With one, I type in my topic and immediately receive a specific article. With the other, I have to learn how to look the topic up, and in that process am inevitably exposed to other topics which may catch my attention and allow me to learn a bit more.

My suggestion at that time, and one I would probably stand by today, is that computer technology in the classroom should be delayed until the Junior High (7th or 8th grade) level. In America at least, we see quite an opposite trend, where children are exposed to technology at younger and younger ages.

Re:Computers Okay if They are Delayed

[Anonymous Coward]

And I think your spelling was "stumped" by the premature introduction of a spell checker. Try "stunted."

Re:Computers Okay if They are Delayed

[freeweed]

One of my primary arguments was that the development of fine motor skills and handwriting was stumped when children are allowed to type and use the mouse rather than write, paint, etc.

Keyboarding and mousing develop fine motor skills. Unless you only are concerned with people's abilities to write cursive script and/or paint. Personally, I'd say a lack of keyboarding and mousing ability is a much greater hinderance in today's soceity.

With one, I type in my topic and immediately receive a specific article. With the other, I have to learn how to look the topic up, and in that process am inevitably exposed to other topics which may catch my attention and allow me to learn a bit more.

Let me introduce the concept of hypertext. I usually end up on some pretty deep-linked tangents when researching something, myself. With an encyclopedia, you're only likely to hit something that's related due to alphabetic coincidence. With hypertext, you're far more likely to want to learn about something similar, and it's remarkable just how far you can go with this concept. I once spend 2 hours reading about the French revolution and Napoleon after looking for info on an obscure CPU I couldn't find opcodes for. Granted, you prefaced this with "before the WWW", but frankly I'd like to know just what information source you had access to in 1993 that allowed you to research virtually any topic with a simple query. I suppose the very early non-linked electronic encyclopedias...

My suggestion at that time, and one I would probably stand by today, is that computer technology in the classroom should be delayed until the Junior High (7th or 8th grade) level.

They said the very same thing about books, a long time ago.

Not to be too critical of your post, because you do touch on some interesting areas not already covered, but it strikes me that when stories like this come out, we just drag out the old arguments against books/comics/music/television/etc.

Change really isn't that scary, people, honest!

Re:Computers Okay if They are Delayed

[Anonymous Coward]

could lead to severe developmental progress

And we wouldn't want severe progress, now would we.

Did you use computers a lot when you were a kid?

Spellbinding.

[twitter]

Computers can be extremely powerful tools for learning, but only if used in proper context.

Now there's a thought. My favorite quote from the article:

consensus holds that more research is needed to know exactly where computers make the most difference in an educational process. "There's this sort of bizarre belief that computers cast a spell over students and teachers and schools," says Christopher Dede, professor of learning technologies at the Harvard School of Education. "Can you imagine what would happen if you had the same in business, asking if computers were interfering with performance? It would be a big joke."

But it is a big joke. The spell has been cast by salesmen and silly adverts, such as M$'s "we see your potential" series. The same thing has happened in the business world. The result is that general purpose junk has been sold without clear and careful thought about use. Most schools are on the fourth generation of general purpose boxes run by people who have no clue about what real use can be made from them.

I didn't see mentioned anywhere in the article what types of software these kids were running.

They did mention that, but I would have liked to see more:

Academic performance rose among those who routinely engaged in writing e-mail or running educational software.

This comes as no surprise. People who write, learn how to write. Well written educational programs draw people in so that they spend their time learning. People who spend their time playing games would probably not be doing their homework if they did not have a computer, so the results are self selecting.

I'd have liked to have seen an OS breakdown. Debian has a wealth of scientific applications for the older kids who don't get the good computer useage the Openhimer group called for. Gperiodic, kstars and the like are excellent for anyone but especially useful for 12 and above. It's fantastic collection of mathematical routines, data manipulation tools, editors and publication aids are great for university level students. Even the Debian junior toys are good for younger students, though I've seen dedicated leaning feedback computers like magic pads that play games that are better for toddlers. My two year old liked playing tuberling, but most often plays with real world toys.

what the ??

[Anonymous Coward]

For those Slashdotters with children, how do you deal with your kids' computer use? I am a kid, you insensitive clod!

"Learning"

[stevedekorte]

The author of the post seems to assume that high grades are a good measure of learning. I'm not so sure. Einstein had poor grades, did that mean he wasn't learning?

Perhaps i'm just different in my judgement then.

[Polarism]

You're basically saying that formal education is a filtering tool, and I disagree.

The filtering tool, is the on-the-spot assessment of their intelligence, not how many pieces of paper they can pull out of their ass. In my experience, here's the basic list of what most people actually "learn" in college:

1.) Time management
2.) Slamming beer
3.) Self-motivation and task/goal orientation/execution
4.) Sometimes even some better communication skills, not guaranteed though.
5.) The false notion they actually know anything.

Then again, i'm used to working in mission environments, perhaps the "real-world" has an incurable amount of bullshit naturally associated with it.

I do not feel they are mutually exclusive.

I feel they either are, or aren't, based upon the situation.

You're attacking me from too much of an objective angle for you to be making any valid points.

Re:Hrmm -

[cobalt397]

OK, wait one darn minute there. Two things to consider:

a) When was the last time you used a grammar check program and found it to provide impeccable assistance? The suggestions can range from the robotic to the comical -- a far cry from flawless. Applied to a chat room situation, where comments are volleyed back and forth, such a programmed check system could create discontinous mayhem and unfortunate misunderstandings.

b) You've just unwittingly (I think) illustrated the problem -- namely, hyper-reliance on technology to spoon feed the "answers." Grammar, like most knowledge, requires a clear understanding of context, as well as a cushion of time to 'imprint' on the learner's mind.

Computer-prompted corrections happen fast and can be very arbitrary in nature. Even if the learner takes a moment or two to absorb the grammatical lesson (assuming the lesson is correct!), it's highly likely that the reason for the correction will be forgotten as soon as the next prompt appears. Or -- even worse -- the recall will float in the learner's mind stripped of context or subtlety, and they may develop a bad grammatical habit based upon a mistaken "rule!"

The Minister's Daughter

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed... the axiom of the "Minister's Daughter" tends to be all too true; I've known more than a few children of pastors, and they're most often the wildest of the bunch. Although to their credit, they also tend to be the least caught. Parents who provided a fair amount of freedom and let the kids take the full measure of responsibility and consequences for their actions seemed to wind up with the most balanced kids. Heck, my mom caught me taking a pack of gum from the grocery store when I was 5 - she not only turned me in to the manager for shoplifting and asked him to scare the shit out of me, but docked my allowance (a whopping $0.50 a week) until I had repaid the store 7 times the cost of the gum. The manager actually called the police in, listed the consequences, etc. Lessons like that tend to stick with you for awhile, and many times, they can only be learned the hard way.

I can vouch for these results.

[Anonymous Coward]

My cousin has his own computer business and two little crumb-grabbers of his own. His son is six years old, and his daughter is four years old. Both have been exposed to stupid computer games and television shows alike (i.e. nothing remotely close to being educational) since they were rather young. I'm quite certain that both of them grew up watching "Dora the Explorer" and "Strawberry Shortcake" (don't even try to convince me that either of those shows are educational--I'll stab you). Anyways, I hate to say this, but both of them have the worst social skills that I have seen in my entire life. Neither can read well, both have, what seems to be, a speech impediment, and neither of them have any friends. I hate to be a penny pusher, but when I was six I was never at home, I was always out with my friends or over their house--not to mention I could read when I was four and a half.

Just a few weeks ago I was over my cousins house and my cousins friends kids were also over. Their son was the same age as my cousins son, and the difference in the way they talked was night and day. My cousins son can't even hold up a conversation for more than a few minutes before he goes nuts or just stops making sense. However, my cousins friends son talked to me for quite a while, regardless that he had never met me before (rather well spoken for being a six year old, might I add).

Of course, this may just be some isoloated problem with these two kids (poor parenting?), but I'm merely drawing conclusions based on what I've seen.

Teacher to asshole, teacher to asshole...

[Pollux]

some people don't have to study to get good grades...I couldn't be bothered to spend that much time doing shit I already knew.

In my classroom I would call you a black hole. Not only do you take the teacher's time and suck it down that deep gravity well of arrogance but you end up sucking the energy from others who don't have that level of knowledge and really need some of it from whatever source they can get.

And you know what's great? Not only do I fight black holes like you, but I also fight another black hole, Yahoo Games. There are not a lot of people like you and me who are smart enough to absorb information like a sponge and retain it despite our inept study habbits, particularly referring to the electronic form. In the mean time, we end up sending the message to everybody else that drowning your mind in a melting pot of Flash entertainment will not harm our cognative development.

And the poor kids who have an attention span of a misquito end up losing.

Your post sounds like a boast of "Education failed me, but hell, I'm a success, and I'll be damned before I stop saying that nobody should give a rat's ass about public education." Thanks. Truth be told, you kinda remind me of roadkill. You think you're so bold when you dash across the highway, but your eyes are so close to the ground, you'll never get a chance to see the car coming before it runs you over.

Re:Teacher to asshole, teacher to asshole...

[rhakka]

Where did I say I was a success for one,
Why should I apologize for being able to pick up schooling quickly and easily without repetition for two,
How does admitting that I flunked out of school in spite of my ability to process information sound like arrogance for three.

I was a kid. I did what I did with what I had, and it wasn't enough when I got to college. At most I am simply trying to say that not everyone does have to do homework to "succeed" in grade/high school, backing up a previous poster, and that for others like me who are in school now, all those people who say "you won't be able to get away with this next year" every year will, ultimately, be right when you go to college.

Your post sounds like someone has is a little insecure about their intelligence. Relax. I'm sorry that relating a personal experience of mine threatened you so much.

Re:Teacher to asshole, teacher to asshole...

[rhakka]

well I reread, and gather that you are a teacher. You should understand then that you know nothing about me, nor the classes I took or my classmates.

You fight all the black holes you want. Maybe you should suggest your brighter students for some other, more advanced kind of study so they can keep themselves occupied while you help students that need it.

I had a teacher once in grade school... we just got prealgebra books for the first time (rural school). Our class, however, got stuck on percentages (eigth grade, no less).

There were five of us that got it. she handed the five of us prealgebra books, photocopied the tests, put it on her desk and sent us out in the hall to teach ourselves math. We went at our own speed, she came out for 5-10 minutes a day to help us if we needed or would spend a few minutes after class explaining things if needed... and she didn't very often, because we helped each other and generally SOMEONE got it... and we took the next chapter's test whenever we wanted to.

We taught ourselves the textbook in a half year, when it should have been a year, without very active teacher participation. To this day, I don't think she was the most intelligent teacher I ever had, but she was definitely the BEST teacher I ever had, because she made the situation work and work well for everyone. She got to help the students that needed it, and gave us the room to run that we wanted.

So, don't blame smart kids because your educational system sucks. Blame yourself for not knowing how to deal with them.

Re:Teacher to asshole, teacher to asshole...

[ajna]

This is what happened to me, too, except substitute 6th grade for 8th, and 3 kids for your 5. Add in a summer course of geometry before 8th grade and I was done with Calc BC by 10th grade, at the tender age of 14. During middle and high school I did do the homework, however, although often in the 5 or 10 minutes before class began. This came to bite me in the butt my own freshman year in college, but I perservered, swallowed my pride, and actually began to work for the first time in my life.

Now, a year out of college, I'm in med school. Here I'm surrounded by people who like what they're studying (I do as well), and studying a LOT is the norm. And, at this stage, it actually matters whether I know my stuff, so I put my nose to the grindstone and join in, no matter how much it hurts.

I was quite the academic phenom at a young age (not just in math, I was a SET kid), and this helped me in some ways: I never felt the need to compete in a vicious manner or belittle others' achievements since I'd already had the institutional pat on the back from a young age, so to speak. However, it also made me complacent, and this complacency almost was my failure.

The moral of my rambling, self-congratulatory story? Not everyone who finds the pace and scope of traditional school easy ends up falling by the wayside. We all have to learn how to apply ourselves, and to grasp that being smart is simply not enough on its own. Growing up as a precocious youth one often feels that being gifted means that less effort should be expected of oneself, and that academics is a game in which the goal is to find the least amount of work that will appease the taskmasters. I encourage those who might feel this way to go to a competitive school, and learn from the positive example of their peers that the application of one's talents is as important as their mere existence.

Re:Teacher to asshole, teacher to asshole...

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn, you didn't even read the grandparent's whole post before you replied. Three sentences in, something pissed you off, and you ranted. You completely missed out on how not completing homework fucked the guy later in life.

I accept that this is normal behavior for Slashdot, but as you claim to be a teacher, I would expect you to uphold a higher standard.

I shudder thinking of the habits your students learn from you if this is your normal behavior. On the other hand, you may just be having a bad day. Either way, your post lost all credibility.

Re:Teacher to asshole, teacher to asshole...

[EastCoastSurfer]

Why fight smart kids? Instead lets fight the constant dumbing down of the classroom. School needs to be challenging for kids or they will disengage.

There is no PC way to put it, but some kids are above and some are below average. You hurt both groups by trying to fit them into the same average class. What ends up happening is the class slows down to the pace of the below average students and you end up with more 'black holes' as you put it.

It's worse now though, because you end up having average kids who think they are above average and get slaughtered in college.

Forget the kids

[St. Arbirix]

How do I deal with my own computer use?

It's exam week and I'm posting to Slashdot.

Holy sacred cow!

[waffleman]

Wow. This is a quite a piece of flamebait for the /. crowd :-) Recognizing this, I'ld like to make a claim against computers use with kids. Well, let's say kids under the age of 15, as example.

The wealth of knowledge accessible through computers won't make children have better grades. For example, they can't write better papers, or make nicer projects today than they could back in the 1960's. You think they can? How many papers of students from the 1960's have you read? You might be surprised at the quality! Sure, today's kids can include more facts and they can copy and cheat a whole lot easier. But that doesn't mean they put those facts together in any meaningful way. Actually, they might do so in less meaningful ways simply because there is too much to put together.

Now what computers *can* do is mesmorize a kid the same way the TV does. And thinking that kids left with a computer without games, IM, or the ability to surf, will try to figure out how the thing works is just plain naive. Yes some kids will, and I'm sure most /.ers were that type of kid, but the vast majority will be just be bored. Kids are usually not rational. They don't look at something and say, "Hm, lets see if we can figure this out." They react, and they crave things to react to.

The problem with computers is that it is too easy, as it is with TV, to deliver experiences that really just engage reaction with thought. Forget games, just look at all they eye candy in modern GUIs. We react to it, and that's OK, but it is also contrary to the purpose of education. Education is about thinking, not reacting. Educational software is at best a noble effort, but if it is to compete with the other experiences that kids have with computers, it must always compete on a reactive level, and therefore its effect is highly limited.

But what about play? Well, in normal play, kids do make-believe all the time. But a key difference between this and the computer environment is that they control and understand their make-believe worlds to whatever extent they want. Because of that control they get to play out and understand the rest of their experiences. The computer environment just doesn't let them do that. Neither is it reality. So a young mind might not benefit from *playing* in the computer environment that much.

So if it's not for education and it's not for play, it's not surprising that there might be a correlation between their use and poorer performance at school.

Re:Holy sacred cow!

[serbanp]

Lacking mod points today, I would like to thank you for posting one of the rare insightful comments in this thread!

Serban

I disagree.

[Ghostgate]

I think it's way too easy to open up a calculator, spreadsheet, web browser, [insert app here] to do things one should be able to do, or at least know how to do, by hand.

The flaw in your logic is that you still must be able to apply SOME knowledge in order to get the answer that you are looking for. Even if you don't know how the calculations work, you would still need to know why the calculations are important and what they can be applied to.

Sure, you can use a calculator or whatever to perform calculations on some numbers. But, are these just arbitrary calculations you are making? No, they are likely part of some larger problem. And you must know how these calculations fit into the problem, or what calculations to use in the first place. You still need to know the principles behind what you are doing. If you don't, a calculator (or other tool) will be useless to you, except in doing simple arbitrary tasks.

In this way, the tools we have available to us save us a lot of time, energy, and sometimes needless frustration.

I remember some of the more advanced math classes I took in college. A single problem could, at times, take more than 10 minutes of work to solve. And in that time, it was easy to make a small mistake somewhere, even if you were being careful, and ruin the entire thing. Or, you could insert the problem into a computer math program and have the answer in less than a second. Guaranteed correct, if you did not make a typo entering it. As far as I'm concerned, doing such a problem by hand is entirely counter-productive. And you know what? I'm not even sure I want to know HOW it's done. I just want to know why it's useful. I want to know how to apply it to something productive.

Re:I disagree.

[stanmann]

I'm not even sure I want to know HOW it's done. I just want to know why it's useful. I want to know how to apply it to something productive.

If that is/was your attitude, then you didn't belong in the class. You should have dropped it, in fact, I'm not certain you belong on slashdot. IN FACT, you are the sort of person being talked about in the article.

Being able to spend 10 minutes on a math or logic problem builds the mental pathways... THAT is why it is important. Knowing how it's done, at that level is more important than getting the right answer. You don't have to know why 2+2=4, you do need to know why f(4)=7 and f(7)=4.

Re:I disagree.

[Ghostgate]

Well, I may have gone a little overboard with my hatred of a few of those math classes... which were requirements for my major, or I would have definitely done as you suggested and dropped them.

Certainly, in other fields I DO care "how" it's done, so I shouldn't make it sound like I never would. Still, what I DON'T care to do, regardless of field, is to do things over and over the "hard" way (once I know how it's done), just for the sake of doing so. That is what I deem counter-productive. And, that is what those particular classes felt like to me.

That's why I think my original point is still valid. The tools we have - calculators, computers, search engines, and so on - they are just that. Tools. There's nothing wrong with using them to get the job done faster and more efficiently. It saves time and frustration, and offers a lower chance of error. And, you still have to apply other knowledge in order to do so anyway. I don't think these things make people "lazy" per se - each individual already either has that trait or doesn't, and will behave accordingly.

Re:I disagree.

[stanmann]

You were taking calc 3 and 4, discrete math, etc as part of your CS degree requirement.. I know.

Those tools are useful, if it isn't your job to do reasearch, or write software. but until you can do it the hard way in your sleep, the short way doesn't teach you anything.

I enjoy maths and in HS, I went through 4 years with a 4 function solar calculator, while my peers were using 81s and 83s, I surpassed them using a 4 function.

WHY? because I knew why aX^2+bX-c=0 derived in it's various ways.

easy.

[Sludge]

Don't equate academic performance with learning. When I was growing up, I always had a highend computer I could call my own. My grades suffered, but I learned a hell of a lot of relevant stuff. Rather than become a cookie cutter student, I've been able to make something of myself by trodding off of the beaten path.

college

[sewagemaster]

In highschool, I was one of the top students of my class in all subjects I studied. When I was in college, I was one of the students with the worst GPA. I havent been using the internet that much until university, when I started spending at least 8 hours a day at the computer not doing anything academic related. It can be accounted to a couple of things like electrical engineering is much more difficult than the mickey mouse canadian highschool cirriculum, but having the added distraction didnt help either.

Back then it was a guarentee that EE grads get job offers before finishing their bachelors. Of course, looking back I wish I had spend more time on books, and solving problem sets using the old-fashion pencil and paper. If I had done that I would actually be employed having a better GPA.

Having said that, I was able to look at course websites from other universities and also online publications. So it's helpful in that sense - a lot of it has to do with the person's attitude whether they want to do better in school, I'd say.

Dude,

[Anonymous Coward]

That's genetics. You are a bright guy who probably comes from a successful family (which means that one or both of your parents is/are probably pretty bright AND one or both of your parents believe(s) in the value of hard work / success in studies, ...).

These (and other sociocultural influences) have a much stronger positive effect on your academic success than the fact that you own a computer.

Knot soo

[Dausha]

I been uzed mi kompuder al mi lives, an I an' got no phroblem wit edukashun, dat articul is ful of carp. Gimme free more kumpudrs, an' geenyus wil I bee.

Re:CHILDREN!

[Keruo]

> Of course slashdotters don't have kids because that would imply they were getting sex.
we simply clone ourselves, no sex needed to have kids

RE: PC, TV, phone, etc. in the bedroom?

[King_TJ]

I don't know about your statement on parenting... Having devices in a child's room doesn't have to mean anything, really. If the parent has done a good job teaching the kid and making some ground rules for usage of these things, I don't see that it matters an awful lot if they've got, say, a telephone in their bedroom?

My brother and I both grew up having our own color TV set in our bedroom - but I can't remember ever really even using it except when I was sick and lying in bed during the day. Our parents made it clear we weren't supposed to be watching TV after our bedtime - and we were too scared they might hear it or notice the flickering of the screen lighting up the edges around our door with all the other lights in the house turned off; so we didn't do it.

I never had a phone in my room, but I can't see that it would have mattered, either. My parents weren't going to spend $'s to give me my own line/number, so tying up their line was going to get noticed whether I was in my room or in the kitchen on the phone. If I didn't do my homework and got banned from using the phone, I was equally likely to get in trouble for using it no matter where the phone was.....

I also know quite a few parents who let their kid(s) have a Playstation or X-Box in their room, but find it's very good leverage to get the children doing what they want. (The threat of "I'm taking your game system away for the next month if you don't do X or Y." seems pretty useful.)

I think kids should at least get the chance to have a little private space of their own, and feel like they have some "personal technology-related property" of their own. It just needs to be tempered with the realization that these things are privileges, not "rights" - and can be revoked for bad behavior.

Oh no!

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone let those poor computers go on vacation! I mean, they're about to have a breakdown or something.. huh? what do you say?... (re-reads title) oh.. sorry.. thought you meant the computers were hurt.. my bad..

Who Says You Learn Anything in School

[Anonymous Coward]

OK, maybe I'm exaggerating a bit, but in all truth I've learned more from computers/internet than I ever did in school.

Standardization

[Captain Trolltalk]

I think the problem with all these studies and statisitics is the fact that kids are all jammed into a room together, taught the same things, and tested the same way. I hardly call myself an expert on these issues, but going through this education myself and knowing lots of other "misfits", I can vouch for the fact that school itself is what impedes their learning.

For myself, computers gave me access to knowledge, information, and people that I could not otherwise get at school. Going online, I could learn what I wanted to learn at the speed I wanted to. Did this negatively impact my school learning? I would probably say yes. I was more interested in playing with computers, parts, electronics, than I was with reading children's books, coloring in boring worksheets, and other misc. assignments they had us do in school.

In high school, it became even worse for me. I was hardly interested in the state mandated courses (Biology, World History, etc. etc.) but I was more than happy to learn various programming languages, start using Linux back in its early days, philosophy, sociology, and etc., all things I've learned about by just reading things online and meeting people online who held similar interests as I did.

So when anyone talks about judging kids based on grades and other statistics, I cannot take it very seriously. There are plenty of ways to look at a person's intelligence and knowledge other than by just looking at how well they perform in school.

So in short, I would say comptuers were a total boon to my education, but lets not get off on the idea that there is a one-size-fits-all approach to anything in human life. Access to computers will not be the best thing for all people, nor will denial of it either. Education is going to have to get away from the desire to turn students into "units" that need stanardized "teaching" to them.

If you really want to improve education, find a way to balance the need to make a literate population with the need to give us the freedom to pursue our own interests and goals.

Actually...

[Anonymous Coward]

"The mere availability of computers at home seems to distract students from learning." Computers seem to serve mainly as devices for playing games.

Still, there were a few exceptions: Academic performance rose among those who routinely engaged in writing e-mail or running educational software.

(emphasis mine) Based on the article, computers are good for education if used for education -- heh!

28 years ago, it happened to me

[argoff]

When I was 8 or so, I blew off learning spelling in school so I could play on this new device my dad got called a computer (CBM). The funny thing is, yeah I failed most of my spelling tests and I was written off as a McFailure by most of my teachers, but I learn't how to program and use computers while they were learning how to spell.

Now some of those A+ spellers are wonderfull secrataries, while I program computers and set up corporate IT infrastructure. Somehow, I am not a bit sorry for how things turned out.

Bullshit -- They don't like the computers because

[PotatoHead]

they don't want to have to deal with other opinions in the Christian home. I've seen this and it makes me sick.

Here is the truth about kids 'n computers:

If you supervise the computers, the kids are going to do just fine, if you don't they won't. It is really just that easy.

Linux actually helps in this. A nice OSS computer these days makes a fantastic student workstation. Hell, it makes a fantastic workstation period for a lot of people, but we are talking about kids. The combination of a good web browser, Open Office, some IM software (we use kopete), and a few fun distractions and your kid has everything they need. If they crave more, like programming or scripting, Linux & friends have more to offer than they can likely ever consume.

A win32 machine, on the other hand, is a mess really. Just about the entire frickin' Internet seems to be looking to prey on little kids. I ran one of these monsters for the kids for a while (not sure why, just did). It's a lot of work, and I know what I am doing! Sheesh!

So, a well kept family computer is simply a communication tool and an information retrieval tool. A poorly kept one is that, plus this ugly window into your home.

This is what these folks don't like.

Now, lets get down to the core of their piece. They say increased computer use limits kids ability to develop other learning paths because they trade the computer for other learning forms.

I believe this. However, the number of computers, or where they are located has nothing to do with this problem. Want to know what does? Glad you asked:

Kids with poor academic performance, with very few --and I mean few, exceptions are suffering from the following:

- poor or lacking parental involvement. You don't have to be a smart parent, just an involved one. Heck, learn with your kids, your footing the bill, why not get a refresher? (I do!)

- teacher dependance on the tool. If the teacher does not actually teach, question and challenge the kids, they are not going to get the critical thinking skills these folks are after. (Now that is an oxymoron if you read their material, but that's another discussion.)

Now I need to qualify that second point. There are a lot of fine teachers suffering from a poor educational system. (Hello Oregon!) Ever hear of high-stakes testing? Sure you have and that's the biggest problem we face today. Teachers cannot actually teach given the harsh testing requirements in many educational systems today. Not everybody is going to come out of school doing exactly the same things in exactly the same way.

Why don't people get this? That is why we are people, not robots!

Sorry for the rant, but this point is a touchy one for me.

If you want your kids to be free, critical thinkers, you had better start building them one day at a time. Nobody is going to do it for you, computers or not.

(Where is Paul Ferris when you need him?)

Rant mode = 0

hmmm

[smellis]

I think this study proves that an individual can learn more on his own(though the use of a computer) than in a class environment. This also means that he will miss out on other important skills. I went to college for a short time, but I didn't like how slow the classes were. I learn more in one day of hacking my own PC, than I do in an entire year of college. The only catch is, if you can't tell already, that I am missing out on important english skills. It's hard to balance.

A different view

[thebroken]

I'm a senior high school student. From the 7th grade I was seriously addicted to computer games. I always did decent in school. It wasn't until 10th grade that my parents saw a 'problem' within me. Too much games. Just like any concerned parent would, they took the computer away from me.

I do believe that solves the problem in some situations. But not all.
From the time I first entered high school, I had a fire that burned within my heart. I had hope, I was optimistic, even hard working. I would sometimes try to control myself and not be so nerdy. But I simply couldn't. I just had to play AD&D. I just had to read programming books. I just had to talk about hash tables in chat rooms. There was no way I was going to avoid that.

Everyone deals with their problem differently. I see some kids in school that are really lucky. It's high school, and every boy thinks about girls. People may say one thing on the Internet, but the truth is after a while the lack of attention gets to you. After a while you start thinking why am I doing this? You look around you and see that kids your age are having fun. Not reckless fun, but fun still. They have their own little 'group'. They goto parties, date girls, or just go out with friends and have a good time for whatever reason. I don't have that luxury. It's not that I'm not a confident person. I used to be. But after a while i REFUSED to change myself to be popular. In my opinion, thats not how the world should work. But maybe thats a bit too hopeful of me.

That fire slowly died. I didn't even play games on the computer. I just sat there staring at things, making the minutes go by. I am doing the same right now. I have an English essay and seminar due tomorrow, along with a physics lab. I have not started any of those 3 said assignments. I just don't care.

I am in a middle eastern family living in north America. My parents are quite concerned. I can't talk to them what-so-ever. They are so old fashioned and closed minded that the thought of talking to my dad about girls and depression makes me want to curl up and die. He wouldn't understand. No correction, he would, but he would always give me advise that I can't use.

Forever have I been a letter grade to those around me. It gets very frustrating after a while. I could sit here and code for 14 hours, and my dad would come here and tell me to stop playing games. Yet all those around me are rewarded and applauded for the simplest of tasks.

But of course, no one cares about the boy who programs hours per day.

I used to do that. I have stopped gaming for fun. I have stopped programming for fun. Now the only thing I can do without being totally frustrated is to write. I feel some how robbed. My parents have never once confronted me and asked me if I am depressed. The only thing they ever cared about was a) my interest in becoming a Muslim b) my school grades.

I am not the only boy in my school that is like. I see plenty of very bright kids, borderline genius by my standards (I don't really consider myself all that bright though), who just 'waste' their time getting C's in school.

There will always be that wondering pack of people, looking to have some sort of fun or emotional experience in their childhood, before the adult world hits them.

I would like it to be different.

Re:A different view

[Anonymous Coward]

hmm.. depressed, like to write, sounds like you should become a poet.

Re:A different view

[thebroken]

maybe when my english teacher forces me too. Might help the frustration.

Re:A different view

[Rick BigNail]

Not sure if you are depressed. If you are, you need help. Do your school offer these type of help?

I don't think I could help you much. I experienced perhaps the opposite -- I want to live as a christian but my dad didn't like it. At the end your life is yours.

Ain't my case

[al912912]

As a mexican, chat rooms, message boards, and reading from almost anything on the net has helped me a lot on my english.

Chat rooms are great for learning slang, 'cuz there ain't nobody teachin' u that at school.

When their assignments look like this

[JThundley]

You can cut back your kid's computer use when their assignments look like this.

Shorter languages convey more information?

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree with you in the sense that language isn't a strict set of laws, as there frequently new concepts we invent, and therefore have to name.

But to think that languages should get shorter because they shouldn't convey redundant information is a bit overgeneralizing. I'm not a linguist, but I think the two reasons we have developed such a lot of seemingly redundant structures in our spoken and written language is because:

1) This redundancy allows us to catch something someone is telling us, even if a part of it is lost, we can complete it with the part we have heard - read.

2) We are not computers. We need to pause from time to time, and redundant words fill this time while maintaing the communication channel open.

Another argument I have against abbreviating words, is that we lose thinking capacity. Someone answered a post earlier with a 1984 joke, and despite being just a joke, reducing ourselves our vocabulary _is_ reducing our critical mind, like "shutting down" part of the brain.

If you have a good vocabulary, you can express a whole lot more of things than the standard guy, and that contradicts your argument about information. I think we should fight against our own lazyness when typing in our computers.

Utter crap

[Spacejock]

We have a network in the house, my daughters (7 and 9) each have their own Windows PC with a bunch of stuff. Favourites include Black & White, Morrowind and Age of Empires - role playing, strategy type games. They don't play arcade style games for more than 5 minutes at a time. We have a playstation and a bunch of games, and that setup has an inch of dust on top.

They also have OpenOffice and the Gimp, plus Firefox for the web. (I use Squidguard on a Linux firewall to only allow them a whitelist of sites & urls to visit. E.g. my eldest will be changing to senior school within 2 years, so I've put up the web pages for all the local secondary schools for her to browse at her leisure)

Both kids are years ahead of their age level in reading, math and spelling, and while I'm not saying that's related to their computer use, it certainly hasn't held them back. I have 2 degrees, my wife has a degree, and we have a house positively stuffed with books so we both appreciate the importance of learning and education.

The PC doesn't dominate their free time, either. They spend more time playing in the back garden, or drawing, or doing craft, or writing stories than sitting at their computers. Sure, they might get hooked on Morrowind for a day or two, but then they'll avoid the computer for a week and do something else. One thing they never do is watch TV.

They're both bright, creative kids, and I'm more than happy to feed them challenging PC games. (The same linux server mentioned above has a 120gb drive with images of all my games CDs on, and I've got a networked version of Virtual CD. No damaged disks here ;-) There are complete sets of Cluefinders, Pajama Sam, Putt putt, Jumpstart, Monkey Island, Magic School bus, Baldur's Gate, Icewind Dale, Freddi Fish etc etc just waiting for them to enjoy, and they're capable of installing and patching them for themselves. (Shared games patches folder, too)

What it is to have a network admin for a parent...

Re:Utter crap

[EEBaum]

"They also have OpenOffice and the Gimp, plus Firefox for the web." ... "Linux firewall"

Yours is a geek household. You don't count.

Seriously, though, I think the study addresses the majority of the population, who buy the $400 special at Wal-Mart or CompUSA and plonk their kids in front of some Edutainment and expect them to magically become smarter.

Re:Utter crap

[Spacejock]

What I'm worried about is that someone whose kids are benefiting from computer use will read this study and take away the PCs to make their kids 'smarter'. It's the sort of thing my parents might have done (They're still convinced computers are bad, it could be a generational thing, but I had to save for my first $100 PC and then fight to actually be allowed to buy it. That was 22 years ago now, and it still lurks at the back of my mind when I upgrade my kids' PCs to Pentium III 1ghz with Geforce video cards, 15" LCD monitors and 80gb hard drives.)

Some things are beyond doubt. Smoking and too much sun are bad for you, for example. But the brain is a bloody complicated device, and when the experts start telling us what helps and hinders learning based on studying samples of the population, they're shooting in the dark IMO. There's no place in their methodology for self-motivation, for motivated (or de-motivated) parents, for TV and DVD watching, type of computer use, etc etc. I agree that changing over all Maths or English classes to a two-hour session on Google would be dumb, but I also believe that a few weeks on Morrowind would help any kid with their spelling and reading ability. (There's no speech, you have to read everything to work out what's going on.) There's enough action to keep the arcade generation happy, and enough quests and side plots to engage the brain.

Obviously, my analysis is based on a sample of 2 children and is therefore statistically worthless. I think generalising that computers=dumber kids is also pretty lame.

Saying this, I remember when the first affordable home computers became available in the UK - the $100 ZX81 I mentioned above (and later, the ZX Spectrum). Kids told their parents they would 'help with homework', and the same excuse has been used ever since ;-)

Yoda and Word Order

[Gopal.V]

>think of how weird "yoda talk" seems, even when it isn't technically grammatically incorrect, and understand it just fine you can.

Speaking as a non-native speaker of english , my language would order verbs in EXACTLY the way yoda does. In fact, English's order of verbs sounds (sounded) alien to me when I was learning to speak. But after nearly 20 years of constant usage, it's my natural language to write with.

All that said, I did learn to write English first and my mother tongue later - which had more to do with the curves and the 100 odd glyphs involved in my language.

Ironically, English has become the lingua franca of the modern world . And it's evolving on its own.

And what a wonderfully unbiased organization...

[syousef]

The Christian Science Monitor...

Stop right there. Whenever any organization with religious motivations starts to tell you that technology is bad, you should take it with a grain of salt.

Frustration in Education

[gitana]

Unfortunately there is plenty of room for frustration on both sides of this issue.

Students who quickly assimilate the information taught in school do not see the need for homework. For them this is just idle busy-work, reinforcing concepts for which they already have a firm grasp. Unfortunately for them one of the important lessons learned in early school years is actually how to do this homework. Many of these students encounter this deficiency later on in their lives - I was definitely one of these.

On the other hand, as the frustrated teacher's post above me demonstrates, a teacher's job is nearly impossible and the more student's educations they are in charge of, the greater the challenge becomes. No two students are going to learn at the same pace or in the same manner. Oftentimes teachers can not focus on the very bright but bored students -oftentimes this is because the students who are struggling with a particular subject need to be brought up to par before a teacher can even begin to worry about teaching homework habits, or further challenging a students who prematurely grasps the curriculum.

I Remain Dubious

[Anonymous Coward]

I had a computer in my room starting at some point in elementary school. By the end of high school I had seven or eight in my room, each doing various things...

I ended up going to MIT, so clearly it couldn't have hurt my academic performance that much.

Ok... So?

[pavera]

I would agree with the conclusion of this study... I saw it happen in my life, but I wouldn't change anything about it. I got my first computer that was *mine* when I was 15 just after my freshman year of high school... up until then I was pretty much a straight a student. However, in my sophomore year I took a cs course (basic and pascal were the languages), and then I had way too much to do to worry about any other homework besides math, chemistry and physics (and cs of course). All my other grades dropped through the floor, but I had found my calling and I wouldn't go back and change it for anything.

I only maintained good grades in math and the sciences because I had fun making the classes easier by writing programs to do my homework for me, or in other ways exploring the equations presented in those classes with computing.

I am now bilingual (after learning computer programming, I had taken spanish courses but never got anything out of them, until after I learned 4 or 5 programming languages, then I went back to the Spanish and it was like something had switched on and I just understood it, I don't know if learning multiple programming languages somehow helped there but I certainly felt that it did)

I think that the main reason that computers negatively affect learning is because they give a child with no foundation a copout. Why learn the theory behind division if you can just punch it into your neat calculator and get all the answers you need for the test. Same for all maths up through calculus.. If that is all you use a computer for, and never *understand* what the computer is doing in the background, yes you will be dumber for using it. A child must build a foundation in math, problem solving, and logical reasoning before letting a computer solve those problems automatically for them, otherwise they will be lost.

In the olden days...

[Anonymous Coward]

We were prohibited from using the nifty solar powered calculators to do basic math, so we used out brain. Today, some kids can't do basic math without calculator. So conclusion can we draw from this?

In Other News:

[Ensign Regis]

Too many hammers hurts carpentry.

Suspect the real issue is Internet access

[darnok]

I suspect the real issue here is e.g. putting PCs with Internet access into kids' rooms, as distinct from PCs without Internet access.

This is an issue I'm struggling with now. With 8 computers in the house (including one Linux firewall), do I put a PC in each of the 3 kids' bedrooms? At this moment, I'm inclined to install e.g. Mepis and restrict Internet access to e.g. 7pm-8pm each day on bedroom PCs; that should remove the possibility of endless hours of pointless IM and downloading WM* files, while still letting them get homework done and talk to their friends for a bit each night. If there's some exceptional circumstance, then Mum or I can invoke the "Internet access extension" clause in our contracts...

Still struggling to work out if this is a good approach or not, amidst the other obvious (e.g. no access, or unrestricted access) and not-so-obvious options. I'd be interested in any other suggestions.

Re:Suspect the real issue is Internet access

[The-Bus]

Do what my parents did. If I wanted to play a computer game I had to write it myself.

CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION!

[blahbooboo2]

Repeat after me...
Correlation is not causation. Basic stats :).

However, the report probably has some validity in regards to wasting money.

Yoda Speaks...

[dabigpaybackski]

When 900 years you reach, speak as well, you will not!

Re:Yoda Speaks...

[Bastard of Subhumani]

When 900 years you reach, speak as well, you will not!

Unless, of course, he's Korean.

It's all about discrimination...

[diver5253]

Parents + 2 kids + 5 computers. Computers are just tools. It's not hard really. The thing is to learn how to use them, how to get something of value out of using them.

My 5 y.o. daughter has as much access to a Powerbook as she likes, providing I'm not using it at the time, and I'd usually defer. She has learnt to get to a couple of sites on which she plays games, many of them educational; print stuff out; launch iPhoto and iTunes and use them in a limited way. Quite a bit of it is self-taught. She's exploring.

And I bet she's both learning and having fun. I also think she's learning to discriminate between good and bad/useful and not so useful, and OK, it's baby steps at the moment. But it's already clear that she has some goals - she particularly wants to learn how to read and so she prefers stuff which is geared to that end. She also likes numbers and very basic arithmetic - so she doesn't actually spend that much time playing games which don't have that sort of content.

We live in the Tropics, so she spends most of her time outdoors with her friends, when not at school. Playing with your mates v/s playing with a computer - sounds like it's about learning to make choices. Yes, she does spend some quite lengthy times in front of the computer, mostly unsupervised. It's not hard to find out what she's being looking at - after all I'm curious! And if she learns nothing else other than how to discriminate for herself between good and bad stuff, be it from a computer or anywhere else, I think it will be all worthwhile.

Irony of the term "Christian Science Monitor"

[bergeron76]

Ok, so a group titled "Christian Science Monitor" is against computer profliferation.

Let's see: Aren't the terms "Christian" and "Science" divergent? If so, "Christian Science Monitor" would imply that they are a group of Christians that are Monitoring Science - which makes sense because science is the only impediment to Christian/God/Greater Being brainwashing.

I'd take _any_ publication from this group with a very large Saltine Crackers' worth of salt.

Re:Irony of the term "Christian Science Monitor"

[Anonymous Coward]

You should probably do a little research before jumping to such conclusions.

1. The CS Monitor is merely reporting the story and obviously had no part in creating it because...

2. It is a newspaper. One of the finest in the US if not the world.

Check it out.

Grammar and living language are exclusives

[Anonymous Coward]

Grammar is often something that is imposed on language and not born of observation.

I remember in grade school as a child pedantic teachers admonishing me to say: "May I go to the bathroom?" instead of can. This was of course based on a petty literal interpretation, that anyone can go to the bathroom, but using may on the contrary distinguishes asking permission. Just imagine extending such foolishness to other areas to take literal other sayings. The purpose of language is to convey meaning and communicating not to fuss over artifical grammar. Everyone knows what is meant by "Can I go to the bathroom?", in the end this pedagogue was making fuss where there was no fuss.

I am almost done reading "The American Language" by H.L. Mencken. I urge others to read it, it will change what you think of language. For example did you know Noah Webster and other philogists do not observe the usage and spelling of many words, but instead suggest their own spellings of words, in hopes to influence the language usage of the masses under their guidance? What is needed is less artifical grammar and more observation and respect for the natural evolution of language which is always ahead of the pedant school marms telling kids they must inquire if they may go to the bathroom. Language is a living thing afterall, rules are always dead and from the past.

Computers hamper education?

[comrade009]

Lol what r u talking bout computers are what gave me these l337 anglish-speeking skilz lol

Best idea ever...

[comrade009]

Someone program a plug-in for Miscrosoft Word that blocks instant messaging while open. Parents would rip the stuff from store shelves.

CHASE YOUR KIDS OUTSIDE!

[blair1q]

Chase your kids outside every day! ...make them use wireless from the backyard...

Did they really measure the problem accurately?

[WhataFreak]

I admit I didn't fully RTFA, because, ironically, I am REALLY tired from being at a computer all day.

But did they really measure the problem accurately? They claim it hurts learning, but how are they measuring that? Are they measuring what really matters?

I almost flunked out of high school because I was on my computer at home all the time. But now, I work in computers for a living and have an income far beyond the US average.

So what if I had trouble in some early-American literature class? So what if I hated biology and barely passed it? So what if I could barely drag myself to some corny creative composition class? I was learning a lot while spending all my time on the computer. I still do. I think I'm a lot smarter than most of the "A" students I went to school with. I bet I'm making more money than most of them, too.

I think the study possibly approaches the problem from the perspective that learning can only happen in a classroom, that the things taught in a classroom are the only things worth learning, and that taking tests in a classroom is the only way to measure learning. I disagree. Severely. But then, I could have RTFA more carefully.

Done ranting. Going to pull myself from the computer and collapse now.

Limiting usage

[travisco_nabisco]

I would agree that it is the responsibility of the parents to monitor the usage of the TV, video games, computer, etc.

When I was growing up, we were not allowed to watch TV or play computer games Mon-Fri. Friday evening was fine. This may sound barbaric to some, and I may not have liked it at the time, but now I can see the vast benefit. It forced me to learn how to keep myself busy, without having to be entertained. By doing this, my creativity was fostered from an early age. I spent more hours with Construx and Lego, than most kids I knew, and it was much more fun than watching TV to me.

I still feel guilty if I watch too much TV on a weeknight. There are much better ways to spend time, go read a book.

But it is true that it all comes down to how the parents decide to raise their kids, and if the parents have control or the kids have control.

Parental influence..

[Sir Pallas]

..is a big thing. We had several computers when I was a kid, but my parents took an active role in my education; and I turned out alright. Perhaps the problem is that parents are using the computer as a substitute and not just as a tool.

I knew it!

[Money for Nothin']

This apparently explains why my grades will suck so much this semester...

This is not the only way

[fbhua]

...to raise kids who'd be successful in their lives. I've met a bunch of commercially successful musicians and art directors in the advertising world. They had pretty normal childhood, unlike what you're putting your kids through. They had more or less unrestricted access to everything. They know what it feels like to get drunk, stoned, and actually have a range of experience from good to evil. See, humans are not perfect. If you're creating art, you should be able to experience and communicate a broad range of experiences. That's what separates the mediocre from the absolute best.

A microwave commercial can say "cook faster so you can have time to spend with your family." Yeah, normal shit. But one that says "...so you have the time to sleep more" grabs people's attention. It's a very selfish thing and that's what people can relate to deep inside. Your holier-than-thou attitude may not be able to train your kids to understand that.

That's the advertising industry. In the IT industry, the very best hackers I know have had irregular lives, and lives on caffeine, junk food and loud music. One of the best school teachers I know spends his spare time playing pool in local clubs and doing pot with his friends.

Let's face it, I haven't met anybody who's among the best with a childhood like what you're putting your kids through. Maybe you're growing up your kids as "reasonably good", perfect citizens but we humans aren't meant to be perfect. Of course, some people get derailed but that's Darwinism for you.

I sincerely hope that your kids won't rebel when the time comes. Other wise, we'll just have a reasonably good member of the community, not somebody who shakes the industry.

Re:This is not the only way

[rhakka]

I'm with you, and I'm not.

Keep in mind people who shake industries are quite often not very happy people. They are driven beyond balance by needs that are not met or were not met elsewhere, and are compensating for that lacking thing, whatever it is.

With that in mind, I would rather my children be happy and live well than do anything else at all with their lives. That has nothing whatsoever to do with comparisons to what other people are doing except themselves.

Re:This is not the only way

[lahvak]

...to raise kids who'd be successful in their lives. I've met a bunch of commercially successful musicians and art directors in the advertising world. They had pretty normal childhood, unlike what you're putting your kids through.

What he is "putting his kids through" actually seems pretty normal to me. Let's see: they eat their dinners toogether, limit watching of TV, limit usage of computer (the kid is 7, for god's sake!), was there anything else I am forgetting? We don't have specific rules like this, but this is pretty much what we end up doing anyway.
Except the loud music, but I am the only one that would violate that rule.

I sincerely hope that your kids won't rebel when the time comes.

Of course they will! That's just the experience you were talking about. I hope my kids will rebel when the time comes (if there is any heredity in that, I am sure they will :)).

School Performance != Intellegence!!!!!!

[farrellj]

Teachers really hate it when you have more current information about the subject they teach. My grade 9 physics teacher *hated* me since I knew more about current physics than he did...but what do you exepct? I read Scientific American every month, and at least one book on physics (one of my ongoing hobbies) a month. He had gotten his physics degree 20 years earlier, and hadn't learned a thing since then. I barely passed the course, I guess writing essays on phenomena of physics that the teacher had never heard of is not the best way to get good marks. :-(

Sorry for the rant, I *hate* the current school system, as it only makes allowance for the "average", that thing that nobody can ever be.

ttyl
Farrell

Careful....

[lysium]

The language defines what we can think about, and how we think about those things. It is not a good thing to attempt to restrict it, since by doing so we are restricting people's thoughts.

That's the Chomsky school of linguistics. There are other equally valid theories, so please don't just state it like it is an immutable fact.

Re:Careful....

[CoolGopher]

That's the Chomsky school of linguistics. There are other equally valid theories, so please don't just state it like it is an immutable fact.

I'll have to bite on this one.

As someone who has English as his second language (Swedish being my first, and German third), I do find it to be the case that the language I'm thinking in very clearly limits what I can think about.

This is not due to having an insufficient vocabulary, but simply because there are some things that there are no words or phrases for in one or the other language. For abstract things, it can make it extremely difficult to express it in the other language.

While I'll accept that it might take significant time to fully subvert a language, there is no doubt as far as I'm concerned that restricting a language would be highly damaging. To take a few concrete examples from an area all Slashdotters would be familiar with, consider the following Swedish words:

• sajt (site, as in web-site)
• mejla to e-mail
• skanna to scan using a (flatbed) scanner

Call them slang, imported words, verbed horrifics, or whatever else you want. By now they are an integral part of the Swedish language, and without them it would be quite difficult indeed to think about the modern uses of computers. Language, as all things, is evolving.

So no, restricting language forcibly is a Bad Idea(tm) in my books. I'm all for increasing the general language skills, but that's what education is for. (Though I sincerely hope we never get to the point where leet-speek is taught in school!)

As with televisions

[Charles Dodgeson]

For families who use computers like televisions (entertainment and babysitting), there should be no surprise that the more boxes the worse the academics. At the moment, I don't think that my 6 year old daughter is harmed by living in a house with 5 computers.

On the other hand, I flunked out of graduate school long ago, and I only had to TVI920 and a 300 baud modem.

Another New Study

[PizzaFace]

A broader critique of technology for children, Tech Tonic: Towards a New Literacy of Technology , was recently released by the Alliance for Childhood.

The brain is wired by experience. How can hours of screen time each day not affect a child's development?

Ever heard of Amiga?

[Anonymous Coward]

It wasn't near unheard of with /my/ crowd.

Peer-Reviewed? NO!

[cory_p82]

One big thing is missing in these articles. Namely: This is not a peer-reviewed publication. It is only a working paper. This throws an immediate question on the validity of the study and data analysis.

If anyone wants to actually *read* it, there's a PDF of it available from the University of Munich's Center for Economic Studies/IFO Center for Economic Research (CESifo).

I don't have the statistics knowledge in the field of Economics to truly analyze this study. I can see that the basic descriptive statistics do not match what they claim... but they apply complex economic formulas to the data to control for "family background and school characteristics". To quote from their conclusions:

This paper has found that despite bivariate correlations that show a positive relationship, once family background and school characteristics are extensively controlled for, the mere availability of computers at home is negatively related to student performance in math and reading, and the availability of computers at school is unrelated to student performance.

Anyone have a good knowledge of multivariate statistical analysis?

Language does change, you are spreading misinfo

[Anonymous Coward]

Freshmen year of highschool I was introduced to Shakespeare. At first, what I was reading was noticeably English but I did not understand much besides a series of disparate words here and there. By the time I was half way into "Romeo and Juliet", I understood fairly well Elizabethan English. Obviously language has not stayed the same since then. Elizabethan English literature must be acquired by reading it for a modern English speaker to begin to understand it, understanding it is not innate, you are spreading misinfo. The mentality, the vocabulary and grammar has changed. For an example, I remember my teacher pointing out in Freshmen year that one of the characters called another "womanish" and at that time it was a grave insult. It is still insulting today to be equated with a women(despite the trend of metrosexuality), but we would not say "womanish", we would say fag, queer, bitch, etc.; even then such an insult would not start a sword duel. The trend of modifying nouns and adjectives with -ish has also died(when was the last time you heard in colloquial speech smallish instead of small or womanish?).

In Shakespeare's works there are many double negatives. In schools in the United States there are many pedantic teachers that tell you double negatives are wrong. They teach that the two negatives cancel each other out. In language a double negative is just more emphatic(even in math (-1)+(-1)=-2, it is (-1)+1 that cancels out to 0). When a Southerner says "I ain't no negro" everyone knows what is meant. No one thinks he is saying he is a negro, not even these buffonish school teachers trying to suffocate perfectly fine living language with their corpses of grammar rules. The same thing can be said with ending sentences with a prepisition and other such unneeded rules.

It's all what you make of it.

[fireboy1919]

I got faster at typing from interactive fiction when I was in middle school.

I've gotten better at handwriting progressively since I started (it used to be very, very bad, and now it's pretty good).

But since the internet, I remember fewer facts than I ever did before, though I read about three times as fast as I used to. I don't believe that this is a coincidence.

You cannot think of why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you remember writing reports on pen and paper? I used to think up a whole sentence before I wrote it. With a computer I think of a sentence fragment and type it, to compound errors, many times I change what I write in one area without seeing if it conforms to the rest of the sentence. (On online discussion of course, with reports I proofread them several times which catches most errors.)

Computers remove the penalty that exists on pen and paper, where if you write something it is hard to change it. So you put more thought with pen and paper on what you write. On the pc, you can always delete seamlessly. Also, what you write on slashdot for example is more akin to some note you would write a friend than something that is to be graded and penalized in school. Despite the grammar fascists on this site, there admonishments do not have the same effect as a poor grading in school.

Causation and Correlation.

[Kelvie]

Please do not mix them up. They studies found a correlation between them. By using a title such as ``Too Much Computers Hurts Learning'', it implies that too much computers cause a decrease in learning abilities. What they found was a correlation, not a causation. It is dangerous to misinterpret statistics.

Too Many Computers Hurt Learning

[BasculeTheFule]

> The Christian Science Monitor is running a story... Personally, I think too much religion in the home is just as likely to cripple kids learning. Hey, Preacher! Leave them kids alone...

You do not understand immersion

[Anonymous Coward]

Immersion? Apparently you do not understand what immersion is. Immersion is not paying for school. My whole family is from Greece and immigrated to the States in the late 1960s. Growing up in my household I heard more Greek than English. My grandparents only spoke Greek afterall and my father was not around, so I would have my grandparents conversing in Greek and my mom conversing with them in Greek. My mother to me mostly would speak English and whenever outside I interacted in English. When I moved out of the same house as my grandparents I was 12. That began the detoriation of my Greek language skills, the family language became English not Greek. When I was in preschool I went to Greece and spoke Greek almost as well as the rest of my peers my age and played with them seemlessly in my grandparents village, I have no memories of communication difficulties. When I went in 2001 I had alot of difficulties on the other hand. To begin with Greek was only a family language for me and this was before 12 years of age that Greek was the dominant family language, so I could not follow a political conversation that would be found in a newspaper, my vocabulary was poor like that of a child, I had no reading knowledge of the language. Since then I have taught myself to read but not write Greek. Afterall in the United States I do not have much use for writing in Greek.

Right now your daughter may be immersed in that expensive school. Or she may not, as in high school Spanish courses I remember classrom interaction being in English not Spanish. Most kids in high school only take a foreign language because it is required for colleges, not to actually learn a language anyway, even conceding that languages can be learned solely in a classroom. But when your daughter is out of school you will be just wasting your money if she does not speak the French language or hear it constantly day to day. Throwing money does not teach languages, it can help but only if the will to learn a language is there and that will is constantly maintained. When your daughter ages if she thinks French is not an asset, if she does not speak it, read it, watch French movies, everday, she will begin to forget it and her French skills will deteoriate. My uncle was born and Greece and came here at age 6, his Greek skills are terrible now. At the very least it is good that from ages 1-18 my grandparents did not pay 15k a year for him to acquire a language he would only forget due to disuse. Same thing happened to my father who moved in the 1980s back to Greece with English, but his English was not as bad as my uncle's Greek. His English grammar and vocabulary was horrible, but he could still communicate fine in English. A typical sentence from him would have been: "I am you father". Unless you have a capacity to immerse her after the formal schooling is over, you are paying 15k a year for her to acquire and then forget a skill.

Apparently you do not know much about immersion if you think paying for a school is immersion. Maybe if you or your wife knew French so you could use French as a family language you could talk about immersion. As things stand with the information you gave, if I am a betting man your daughter will likely have poor French skills if she is in her 20s even if she does take French in high school.

Proper English and education.....

[einhverfr]

Here is the thing---

This talk of "correct (or proper) English" is very misleading, and it is the cause of a lot of problems in our education system I think. Yes, I have this argument with English teachers fairly often, so this is fairly well rehursed. Typos may exist however.

Computer languages are defined based on prescriptive syntax rules, and violating these rules ensures that the computer will not know how to proceed based on the language spec. Therefore if I have a syntax error in C, my program won't compile, and if I have a syntax error in HTML, something strange may occur as the web browser attempts to gracefully handle the error.

Natural languages don't work this way. Natural languages are described using general syntax rules based on existing use. In other words, there is no "correct" English in the sense that all other possibilities are incorrect. Pretending that there is, in fact, gets in the way of teaching people what we want to be teaching them, which is *communication skills.*

The so-called Grade or High School English class is not about correct grammer. It is about stylistics and vocabulary which will help people to develop communication skills, ideally both oral and written. When you look at things this way, debates like the Ebonics debate look rather silly-- yes we can teach African-Americans to appreciate their unique linguistic heritage while still teaching them how to communicate effectively with many other groups. Yes, if you speak or write your resume in Black American English, chances are you won't be able to communicate with everyone effectively. But, that doesn't mean that you have to suppress it or tell people that this is somehow sub-standard or incorrect.

Same with Scots English, Indian English, and any other dialect that we want to define. I am sure the Brits have their share of dialects too... But in the UK, you have the Queen's English. Here in the US, we have Contemporary Standard American English (a.k.a. Standard Broadcaster English).

Re:Proper English and education.....

[CountBrass]

Just a slight correction: Scots is *not* a dialect of English; it's actually a sister language.

Re:Proper English and education.....

[Bastard of Subhumani]

Just a slight correction: Scots is *not* a dialect of English; it's actually a sister language.

Yes. To Dutch. Actually they're all closely related, but sometimes Scots resembles Dutch more than it does English - kirk, boor etc.

Re:Proper English and education.....

[Retric]

Hmm, while I can figure out what you ment by Pretending that there is, in fact, gets in the way of teaching people what we want to be teaching them, which is *communication skills.* I think that the syntax of the english is there to aid redundancy which aids in decoding the meaning faster. I mean I got the meaning of what you said (I think) but with out that redundancy it's harder to feel confidant in the decoding.

While my spoken grammer is above average I was home schooled and thus subject to vary little grammer from 4 - 8th grade inclusive. And thus only realy had one grammer class in 9th grade I I passed with the lowest posible numeric grade. Thus leading to the travisty of english that is this post.

PS: Not spell checked to show ya just how bad my writting truly is and how hard it is to decode english in the raw as it where.

Re:Proper English and education.....

[the_2nd_coming]

Proof that Home Schooling stinks.

Re:Proper English and education.....

[Retric]

LOL, It was that or fail 3rd grade.

I chose to take a risk and I went from failing math to the 99th percentile in most subjects. I also read over 200 books and learned to program in 5 years, hell by the time I was back I could have taken the GED and skipped HS. I mean sorry if taking a student that was failing most subjects to the top of his class in 5 years is not enough for you.

O and by the way while I almost failed English I was taking HONERS English at the time. And I still got out of HS and though college hell I passed the AP English test and got a 700 English 710 math on the SAT's my English hit 800 on the PSAT... But hey I should have sat back in public school and retaken the 3rd grade. Because as we all know knowing when to use who vs. whom is the secret to success in life.

PS: Check out http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/sat.html to see how high those scores really are.

Re:Proper English and education.....

[the_2nd_coming]

No. The secret to success in life is knowing when to punctuate your sentences. the reason that punctuation is the key to success is that you do not come off looking like a moron.

I hate english, however, I can construct a paragraph.

Re:Proper English and education.....

[Retric]

No. The secret to success in life is knowing when to punctuate your sentences. the reason that punctuation is the key to success is that you do not come off looking like a moron.

I hate english, however, I can construct a paragraph.

Look, you can nitpick if you so chose but I don't find grammar that important. Where I a writer I might chose to reprimand you for forgetting to capitalize the first word in your 3rd sentence and the word English in the same message but think it's a pointless. If you feel writing fish and chips vs. fish and chip is important in some settings I would agree with you. However, your implication that it's important to always use proper grammar is ridicules. I place as much effort into clarifying my message as I believe the audience is worth then I move on to more important things. After all it's much cheaper to higher an editor to read over your business correspondence than a stockbroker to make up for and inability to understand market trends.

PS: "I hate English, however, I can construct a sentence." would have had much more bite as it would have kept harping on the idea that I was unable to do such a simple task as apply the rules of grammar to a simple sentence. Instead your insinuation that I would be unable to construct a paragraph comes of as fairly weak, because the rest of your argument does not particularly support it.

Re:Proper English and education.....

[the_2nd_coming]

If you cannot construct a sentence properly, then you cannot construct a paragraph either.

Your reasoning skills also seem to be lacking due to your Home schooling.

Wrong point of view.

[phorm]

We're not learning "less" we're learning differently. By the reasons given we might as well go back to abacuses because even slide-rules are evil technology blah blah blah.

Yes, you could blame the computers, but realistically I think a lot has to be said about the deterioration of the teaching system. I would know, I work in schools and see daily how bad they've gotten. Kids have no respect... yes they didn't have respect when I was in school (and hey, I'm 23), but now they're much more open about doing everything short of (and sometimes beyond) telling their profs to f*** off.
br As for the profs, well, it's rather discouraging trying to teach kids that don't want to learn, somewhat like watching the coding project you babied for the last year get tanked by management in the final stages.

But as to the kids that do want to learn, and make use of computers as a tool... they're going to do more than the previous generation did with a set of fancy calculators. Realistic simulations, architectural tools... computers expand in other areas.

Of course, I suppose I could look at myself. Grandiose projects planned, but after a day of work I'm often sacked and just end up playing games to relax. If I had to sit through some of the classes that students do today, I'd probably do the same...

TV in the classroom

[EEBaum]

Decades ago, the TV was hailed as the next greatest thing in education. Teachers would soon be able to record their own lectures and presentations for a much more efficient, effective educational experience!!!

Hopefully the computer hype will die down soon enough.

Re:TV in the classroom

[Garse Janacek]

Yes, and today you can easily buy DVDs to train you in any number of subjects, from languages to musical performance to cooking to history to carpentry to mathematics to...

The TVs really let us down on that one.

The fact that TV is not always educational doesn't mean that it can't enhance education, and the same is true for computers.

Re:TV in the classroom

[EEBaum]

Indeed. I'm not disputing its potential for usefulness. However, I would argue that in the vast majority of cases, its use is ineffective, while the people that use it THINK that it is the end-all.

Poor athletic performance

[hajons]

Having two kids myself, both using their computers a lot, my main concern is not academic performance (in fact they are both top of their class despite playing counter-strike and other games for hours each day). I am a lot more worried about them not getting enough exercise, which in the long term will have fatal consequences. The discussion on parental control or kids self-control is uninteresting. What is interesting is making them interested in and getting an understanding of what is good for them. That takes a lot more than just telling them "You cant play any more today".

Few comments from me

[strlen]

First, on the topic of Christian Science Monitor, being the source: if you read the ``about'' section on their site, you will see that the newspaper is secular (except for a single religion column, written daily) but is merely published by the CS church -- this isn't a religious right rag, by any means. Not to mention, the study is merely published by them, not conducted. Now Christian Science itself, is a rather spooky cult (they believe that reality is merely a figment of imagination, hate to insult anyone's religious views, but have they heard of Monsieur Descartes?), but is quite different from evangelical Christianity(what is normally termed as fundies).

Secondly, my own responses. The ways in use of a computer can hurt learning is two fold:
- The first is the television symptome. Much like television, the computer if used inapproriately *will* turn a child into someone who is bored, unless a tape of images scrolls in front of their eyes.
- It can, however, also expose the child to far more advanced topics and thus make what he learns in school boring -- this is likely to happen in HS or Junior high.

My own story, is basically this. I've come to the United States first at the age 11, and then at the age 13. At the age 11, I wasn't spending much time behind a computer - in fact, I barely had a functioning computer that I could use. I learned English very quickly, so that wasn't an issue when I later came at 13. At that point, I can only remember myself spending mos tof my day in front of a computer. I was seldom into games, but I quickly found my two main addictions: UNIX and IRC. I've had a functional Linux install at barely 14 years of age.

I managed to pass classes in Junior High and High school. I attended what has been termed the #1 non-magnet public school (may be not so, now) in California. At this point I was spending the entire day, when not in school, in front of a computer. I've been running my own mail, DNS, www etc.. all from my parents living room at that point. School was pure boredom for me, I barely had the ability to keep my attention span. My social life was virtually nil. I only got two A's throughout my high school -- and this is where the point comes in -- those were in AP US History and AP Computer Science, by *no means* hard easy classes. In addition, while I didn't do spectalarly in actually classes, I passed the AP Calculus and AP Biology tests. (The reasons, by the way, why I got into AP classes, is because the school waved any pre-requites.. you could sign up for any class you wished). I scored 1320 on the SAT, nothing too spectacular but decent, given the very little prepartion I put in (first and only try). Given the high academic standing of the school and the competition I faced, I had no chance of being nowhere near top of my class, nor did I even fill all the pre-reqs for most univerisities, having otten too many D's in classes I found boring. So I went to a community college after HS, where given my AP credits I quickly transfered to a reputable 4-year university as a Computer Science major and am steadily on the way to graduation with a FAR higher GPA than anything I've had in high school.

And all, while still spending considerable time in front of a computer. The moral of the story: yeah, I did horribly in high school, and laregly because of my excessive computer useage. So yes, it intervened with my schooling, but it didn't intervene -- in fact, far from it -- it greatly helped my education. At the same time, I'd also like to mention that I've held two systems administrator job (and am still holding the latest one), since Junior year of high school.

Of course my parents (both of whom are Math. Ph.Ds) were also instrumental that I use the computer as a means of learning: they've introduced me to programming, to UNIX, to the Internet, etc...

My advice for parents? If the computer merely serves as an interactive television set (I by the way, grew up entirely without television), then yes limit it by all means if it hurts the child's education. But be sure to be able to identify the kind of relationship the child has with the computer and understand the dichotomy between schooling an education.

Can't be truu

[mysterious_mark]

If 2 many 'puter iz bad fer yuz, tha'd mean peplez like ize which haz a lod uv 'puterz wudz be reawy reawy dum

Memory vs understanding

[willijar]

While indeed computers can replace the need to memorise information they do not replace understanding. Real learning is about gaining and understanding and insights such that you can synthesise new knowledge. The use of computers is somwehat limited in that regard (except for a few notable exceptions perhaps in expert systems and mathematical derivations).

I believe, unfortunately, that students (and many others) are often substituting the superficial ease of "looking uo stuff" online to gaining true understanding. Indeed I see this where students will often plagiarise content from online sources without adding any insight or interpretation of their own. It is intellectual laziness.

Therefore while I believe computers are a useful tool, one which everyone should know how to use, they do not replace a good education. Additonally it is much harder to evaluate online sources than say books - this is part of the low cost of entry to publishing online - there is little peer review o fact checking.

In terms of memorisation, sometime it is only by familiarity that memorisation requires that a deeper unferstanding can easily be obtained. It ican be a useful educational tool, one amoung many.

Christian Science Monitor!!

[IAR80]

I do not let them read Christian Science Monitor.

Computers are A tool, not many

[Beetle B.]

I'm now 25 years old, and have grown up with computers all my life. Can't remember not having one.

I'm against denying any child a computer altogether. It's overreacting. However, I do believe that a "runaway" computer (i.e. one that takes up too much of the child's time) is worse than not having one at all.

People need many skills, and computers provide only a small number of them. It is incredibly important that they attain the basics of all those skills while young, preferably before they even hit the teen years.

There are creativity skills (writing, drawing), spatially related skills (geometry, mechanics, tinkering with objects), logical skills (philosophy, math, etc), physical skills (sports, health, muscles), social skills (no explanation necessary).

God knows I played video games throughout my life until I was about 19. Played so many, and loved them. I don't regret them too much, because unlike TV, I can still look back at those days and enjoy those memories.

And I did gain from it, no doubt. I learned all about computers, and became somewhat of a guru on them.

Now that I'm older, and have seen more of the world and it's people, I can tell you I know what skills I missed out on.

Yes, I'm a computer guru. But you know what? The guys I know who balanced out their skills when young, those who know only a little about computers, could, if they wanted, learn all about computers and surpass me in a few years. Easily.

Those skills they learned young act as templates. Once you have those templates, all that's left is adding material into their brain and it will know what to do with it in the most efficient manner possible. I only have a few of those templates. They have many. So while they grew up not being "experts" in any area, over time, they can surpass me in virtually everything. Without my templates, I can never become an expert in certain areas.

Now of course, this is true for any activity. However, computers (and TV's) are notorious for the "runaway" effect, and much more care is needed with those items.

Computers in Business

[wastingtape]

The article ends with...
"There's this sort of bizarre belief that computers cast a spell over students and teachers and schools," says Christopher Dede, professor of learning technologies at the Harvard School of Education. "Can you imagine what would happen if you had the same in business, asking if computers were interfering with performance? It would be a big joke."

Yea, but i'd like to add, at school you won't be kicked out (fired) for being caught playing games. The consequence of surfing the internet for hours or playing games at work is much larger than that of an academic institution. Slap on the wrist? Big whoop.

By the way, aren't we forgetting about all those studies that say that a good portion of employees time goes to surfing the internet, reading/sending personal emails, and what not? For that matter, aren't the phones a problem with people making personal calls for hours?

Correlation is not causation.

[Eivind]

I do know that this is /. and expecting that much from the editors is a stretch, but it still needs to be said: correlation is not causation.

The actual study says they've found a correlation, the braindead /. editor writes (or accepts, whatever) a title which would indicate causation.

Say it again boys and girls, real loud, maybe even the editors will hear it; Correlation is not causation.

Re:Correlation is not causation.

[maxwell demon]

Say it again boys and girls, real loud, maybe even the editors will hear it; Correlation is not causation.

You just infringed on Microsoft's pending patent on IsNot. :-)

Computer geeks, play with your kids!

[gnovos]

Instead of just letting your kids play counter-strike, make them have to jump through hoops, crack firewall passwords, decrypt .shadow password files, make it a challenge. That way when they are done they've learned a valuable skill. And the aiming and shooting skills the aquire at CS will helpt them deal withe consequences of thier new skill as well.

What about CRI?

[adityapatil]

I believe that not only should computer usage of kids be kept under limits but they should also be taught about the right way to use computers. Childern are more prone to Computer Related Injury. If good usage habits are inculcated at an early age, it will pay them in the longer run!!

Computers do slow students down.

[Anonymous Coward]

Of course computers slow students down, just like they slow everyone else down at work. ... Ok, just need to login and start working. Oh, it's not finished loading yet, I'll just go get coffee. Now start Visual Studio - wait - load the project - wait some more - ok, start typing, damn, it doesn't react to keyboard input yet. Oh, now it does, but it ignored the first three words on the line above, just need to go up a line and fix it. up. UP. UP. No, not in the intellisense popup, ESC ESC. Up. Ok, How long time can it take to remove that damn popup, and start to react to the keyboard again? 20 years ago, computers had a keyboard buffer, to make sure keypresses were never dropped, why did they change this? Ok, fixed the first line. (presses enter to go down a line) Whoops, wrong key, should have been pagedown. Now I just need to delete that line break. Now why is there an error in that line, there wasn't before. Oh, it inserted a paranthesis in the wrong place, I'll just have to remove that. "Send error report to Microsoft?" WTF? And I haven't saved yet, come back, you stupid program. Ok, start Visual Studio again. Now everything is locked up. Ctrl-alt-delete -> Task manager. Why doesn't the tast manager appear? Ctrl-alt-delete. Ctrl-alt-delete. Ctrl-alt-delete. Pull power plug. Reinsert. Wait for system to boot. Login. Wait for booting to complete. Rebuild active desktop. Start Visual Studio. Wait. Load project. Wait some more. Go to lunch.

Supervised Learning

[mcraig]

I have to disagree with the general statement

Time spent playing computer games is time wasted.

Case in point I have a younger brother aged 7 he's been allowed to play Super Mario Sunshine and Pokemon on the GBA. This has actually improved his reading skills. Why? because he's interested in the material. The important point is that he is supervised and I help him with words he doesn't know and stop him just clicking past text he doesn't understand.

The key point is that at his age any activity should be supervised for him to benefit from it. If you just drop your kid in front of a computer with edutainment software loaded, their not going to automatically become smart. Parents need to take responsibility for their own childs education.

Personally I feel that blanket bans on TV, Games, Internet etc. are not so much draconian, but they also smack of the parent not wanting to take the time to get involved with their childs education. Just ban it, nice and quick and I can get back to doing what I want to do. Wrong just because you ban TV and Games you think they're going to turn to a copy of Pride and Prejudice? Not likely chances are they'll go out with some friends skateboarding.

You also foster the impression that learning isn't fun, when learning can be just as much fun as play at times.

You don't need computers to learn!

[loic_2003]

I never had to use a computer for anything properly useful (reading, writing, etc). I remember when I was at school lessons involving computers were never useful and always considered a cop-out as by the time the (usually non computer-literate) teacher had got all the kids sat down, and after all the 'problems' (kids closing the apps, screwing around) had been fixed, three quarters of the lesson had been wasted. Word processing is a different matter, however, but most people have a computer at home these days and shouldn't really need to spend much time on typing lessons or anything; there seems to be such an influx if ignorant kids/young people these days it concerns me deply that society is failing these people (parents are easily the #1 cause of this, I'm sure). I think lessons on how to use a computer are important since they play such a huge part of today's society, but all this talk of lessons on a computer or even over the net is, in my view, poppycock. The first time computer use was genuinley useful for me was at A-level when I studied computer science.

If you have many computers, specialise at least

[danila]

I think a neat way to solve the problem would be to force kids to use different computers for different functions. For example, I can envision the following scenario where the child uses computers:

1. A cheap slow computer in his study with MS Office (SPSS, Mathematica, Visual C++, etc.) and an expensive large LCD (or two). No Net access.
   
2. An expensive machine with the latest video card and CPU and a multimedia projector in the living room.
   
3. A cheap computer with a small LCD in the corridor (where the parents can easily monitor it) without chair (for use while standing). Net access (browser, e-mail, IM, etc.).
   
4. A tablet PC with good display, battery life and poor everything else. Just for reading.
   
5. A slow PC with Net access and easily washable keyboard in the bathroom.

Of course, the gaming machine can be replaced with a console, the tablet can be replaced with an ebook reader.

Under this scenario the kid would naturally be controlled by his parents and, although he would still have considerable freedom in using computers for fun and slacking, he would be gently nudged in the direction of working when he is supposed to be working and having fun in his free time. It also helps immensely when fun and work are physically separate. I am 24 and often I can bring myself to work on anything when I can play Half-Life 2 (which sucks, BTW) or slack on the Net. :(

Re:If you have many computers, specialise at least

[danila]

"often I can bring myself" should be "can't", of course.

A Joke?

[Anonymous Coward]

""There's this sort of bizarre belief that computers cast a spell over students and teachers and schools," says Christopher Dede, professor of learning technologies at the Harvard School of Education. "Can you imagine what would happen if you had the same in business, asking if computers were interfering with performance? It would be a big joke.""

How may business let you install/play games and surf for pr0n? Ok, this is slashdot after all, I mean the rest of the world. Com'mon. Really.

Disclaimer, I am at work right now. Surfing.

Drat, foiled again.

The number 1 way computers can help children

[brunes69]

... is you no longer ever have to say "I don't know" when Johnny asks you "why is the sky blue?"

You say "I am not exactly sure Johnny. Let's go find out together", and look it up. I can say now, I wish upon wishes that I had the Internet as a resource when I was a young child. There is nothing more stifling to a child's creativity than being unable to have all their questions answered.

When your child is inquisitive, encourage them. Look up the information together. Discuss it afterwards. Any young child will undoubtably ask a myriad of questions about the world, so there is no need to set aside time to do this - just taking the fifteen minutes out of your busy schedule when they *do* ask is often the hard part. But it will also gain the greatest rewards.

You will be surprised how far fostering a thirst for knowledge form a young age can go.

A new oxymoron? University of Munich - study.

[jamej]

Yeah, and exercise is bad for your health, beer is good for your liver, and caffine helps you sleep. I assume this insightful study was referenced in the famous peer reviewed "Journal of Irreproducable Results"?

South Korea, Most wired Nation, Best Students

[guidryp]

We Need to study South Korea, The most wired nation on earth, yet they have among the best performing students on the planet.

http://www.koreaherald.co.kr/SITE/data/html_dir/ 20 04/12/08/200412080007.asp

Dr. Skinner Lives!

[meripixie]

Dr. Skinner made these things called "learning machines" in which if you put in the right stimulus you would get the right response. A computer is a glorified learning machine. Even Skinner admitted that they were not for forward thinking but instead to have a better way to perform "drill and kill" excercises. By the way, Dr. Skinner was also the creater of a glass crib which was basically a way to deprive babies of human contact. He used it on his own daughter. People have rightfully stomped on those as well as a lot of the Behavior Modification crap, so why are we still expecting computers to enhance the minds of our children? Computers are not teachers, but they seem a lot less expensive than a salary.

Not the chat fault

[Anonymous Coward]

Language is not the same everytime, everyplace. People uses it differently depending on the situation. You'd be shocked if you see the Queen talking like your buddies at a bar, and you'd be also if your buddies start talking like the Queen in a speech.

The trouble is no teaching the kids all ways of using the language and that each have its use.

i dont nderstand.....??

[PenguiN42]

hw culd using teh net hurt lerning?? u get lots of prcatice lrning hw 2 rite n use gramer & english! isnt writing skilz importnt 4 schol & acadaimea??

the key is the parents

[austar]

For a child there is only one important thing any child needs for school or a happy life, both as a child and an adult. Parents who are involued in their child(rens) lives. All any child wants to know if they are important to their parents. Do the parents use machines or sitters to keep the kids out of the way? Or is the home a place of love and acceptence for the child? If your child knows they are loved and needed and not a burden to them, the child should be able to do well in school. Maybe not a stellar student, but at least above average. With love and happiness in the home, all is possible.

lets try some new education

[jago25_98]

It's outdated.

My ability to understand

"l337 5p34k c4n 0n1y hur7 gr4d3z"

could be a problem in the future. As an old man I might recieve txt messages from my younger colleges and find it hard to function in this new workplace.

Lets not change the grades ... just make other ones available for fun.

Yeah!

[paranode]

And what about people with speech impairments?

ist not my teh fault tat i takl this wayy...

if chatrms wuldn't allows bad grammer than i wuldnt b able 2 talk w/ my friends.. oh teh noes

It's just like TV

[stry_cat]

In school I use to watch about 4-5 hours per week more than the other kids. The teachers always were concerned that it would affect my learning.

Well it did. I learned way more from TV than I ever did from school. That's because I was watching the educational programs. I was always 2-3 grade levels ahead in math and 1-2 in reading. By time I got to middle school I was on the accelerated track and in high school I was in all advanced classes. Heck I even skipped the 11th grade and got out a whole year early.

Now if you use the computer a lot, you can learn a lot or you can waste a lot of time. If you spend all your time playing Doom it's just like spending all your time watching the real world.

The computer like any tool can be used for good or evil.

Teacher over reliance on computers and media

[Petaris]

I work in a school district as the IT Coordinator and I must say that it seems teachers, espeacially those in the elementary grades, have an over reliance on computer games and tv/video media. Every time I walk throught the halls at the elementary school I see kids sitting watching tv or playing an educational computer game. Now I'm not saying by any means that they should not have computers or even that they are not using them correctly. But I believe perhaps there is an over reliance on them and I feel that techers use them as a babysitting solution so they can do other things.

I also believe it is hurting the children's education. I do not say this without some level of premis, nor do I say it lightly. The state and national tests indicate a slow but steady drop in reading, reading comprehention, math, and other skills with the increase of computer and media use (in my district). I have not done a formal study on this, it is merely my observation. When I was in school there were not many computers and what they could be used for was pretty limited. Also videos were not a daily, weekly, or even monthly routine. They were the most dull, and boring educational viedos know to man. But it was always a treat not to have to listen to the techer for 45 minutes. The improvments in media and computer content for educational use has made great bounds forward since then, but the over use has started diminishing their usefullness.

Computers and media have their usefullness, but perhaps we should show them as a tool and not an overall solution to everything.

But its just a suggestion. :)

Nah, just a matter of "how", not "how much"

[tchernobog]

Back in the good days, you actually had to know a lot in order to achieve something good with a computer. You had had to have a pretty good idea about how to traverse directories from the command line, for example, and to learn to use msdos commands; editing files by hand was everyday work (do you remember that damn config.sys?), and so on.

Now people click on a fancy icon that downloads an album from the internet and burn it on cd in thirty seconds, play doom3 and hl2 all the time, and thinks that "they know all there is to know, since they use internet, which is the icon on the desktop with the blue 'e'". Oh, Lord.

I teach to some children(aged between 10-16) how to use a pc, and I do it only with gnu/linux systems (usually eduKnoppix). They usually grow _asking_ questions, both to themselves and to others, and they demonstrate also pretty good knowledge of the underlying system. For a 12yrs old child, understanding what 'kernel' means is something you aren't accustomed to.

This not because they're geniuses (or, hell, I've an hit rate of more than 80% finding them among the youngsters). It's just because the different model and ideology that's behind the thing.

While I am at it, I've to say that the Good Games that Made You Think (tm) aren't there anymore (thanks LucasArts to have killed S&M2, btw...) because they have no market. Nobody seems to want to think, whatever is his age (we're talking about kids here, but what about older people? Do they stop learning?).

So a lot of the computer world can either make you really lazy (since they do all the work for you, and the thinking too!) or boost your knowledge (leaving the thinking to you, and just doing the hard job). It's just how you use them.

----
Ignorant people are people easier to control. Governments know it well...

Computers and learning

[joeyblades]

Frankly, I think the correlation is without merit. I have two kids; each with their own computers; each with unlimited internet access; one in the Honor Society and the other in the Junior Honor Society. Of course, neither of them use their computers to play games and they have both been instructed NOT to believe everything they read on the internet. It's less about the tool and more about how one uses the tool. A hammer can be used to destroy a house, or it can be used to build a house...

It dont matter

[motionb]

I have 8 computers in my house, my kids by choice play on they're pc's maybe a total of 1 hour per week, they are 9 and 12 yrs old. They have broadband connections at they're pc's in they're rooms, cartoon network is just about the only thing my 9 yr old plays on, and of course cheat planet for PS2,Xbox, and Gamecube cheats. My 12 yr old does her school research on hers more than anything. Most of the time, the choose to play with they're friends outside, and they are both A / B occasionally C students, never a bad report on them. I honestly believe it has more to do with the childs personality than anything else, I have seen kids raised by the same parents, that one is in jail for drugs, and the others are A students and very Bright College students, go figure.

testing

[subrama6]

i wonder if this speaks to testing mechanisms. asking rote, fact-based multiple choice/true false questions that can be easily googled might be an issue here. isn't it possible that computer usage might increase very particular bands of knowledge that aren't being tested appropriately?

Computers or typewriters?

[KludgeGrrl]

Correctly applied, computers can aid learning. I have absolutely no skill at all at operating a pen. It has the worst user interface ever designed. My grades in English were consistently Cs, with the occasional B. Once we were allowed to use computers to type essays, they shot to A or A* and stayed there (until I dropped English aged 16)

Ah... I had a similar experience but, given my age, the change came not from computers but typewriters. Typing let me write quickly enough to be coherent. Using a keyboard can be a real boon, and is increasingly understood to be necessary for some students. For example, I had no trouble convincing my department to allow me to type my doctoral comprehensive exams although it is not standard practice.

As for computers being bad for learning -- I would agree with many posters and argue that it is only bad if it distracts the student from reading (as in novels, not IM). Having taught university in the states the increasing illiteracy of students seems to be the number one problem I saw. They have trouble with reading. Books are "too long," or "too hard." Vocabularies are apalling. It's a sad state of affairs.

Too bad we're too smart

[Zareste]

Poor academic performance has always meant the person in question is not the mindless zombie they're expected to be. Computers, unfortunately, let people access information about nearly everything known to man. When they want to find out how a rocket is made, they can look it up. This is very bad for the school system, as knowledge faults a person's obedience to authority and makes them lose interest in learning useless half-correct information, so grades go down. The worst part is that computer screens nearly make paper obsolete (nearly) and typing lays waste to manuscript, so a person's ability to write lines for no reason is skewed.

Also, shouldn't people be a little more skeptical before they act on every single study there is?

Mixed blessings

[theolein]

I grew up without computers (I had my first programmable calculator in 1980), writing at school and university was done by hand and reading was done out of books. My grammar and spelling has, in general, been quite good over the years and I do notice that the younger computer generation, i.e. those who grew up with them tend to be worse at spelling and grammar than the older generation. On the other hand, they can generally type much better than I can.

That I suppose, is life. Skills change to suite current requirements.

Corporal Punishment

[Anonymous Coward]

Beat them.

Shakespeare was a linguistic rebel

[SeanDuggan]

^_^ Mentioning Shakespeare is in interesting, as he had a tendency to invent words and phrases for his plays. There is a place for evolution in language, even in IM. *shrug* That said, some of the modifications smack of laziness (no capitalization or punctuation, abbreviations like "4eva") or just being cute (133t-speak, "y2k+1"). I developed my language skills by virtue of parents who constantly corrected my grammar and proofread my papers typed up on the computer. When I started chatting online, it never occurred to me to deviate from the standard laws of grammar and spelling. *grin* Besides which, I got a kick out of people always guessing my age too high. It's a heady feeling for a 9-year-old to be treated as an adult.

As for computers reducing learning... *sigh* I could definitely see it, at least to some degree. At one time, my leisure activity was reading, everything from biographies to trashy science fiction. Now, a lot of my spare time is spent playing computer games or chatting online. My youngest brother barely reads at all, having grown up with the computer and TV (Yes, I had a TV growing up, but my parents didn't believe in us watching more than an hour a day). It may be valid to argue as to whether reading really gives that much more benefit than computer games, but in my opinion it does.

Computer chess at 5

[AttilaSz]

I just introduced my five-and-half y.o. son to computer chess http://turbulence.org/spotlight/thinking/chess.htm l after I couldn't keep up with his demands to play chess with him all day (have a job...) I think he spends his time much better than if he sat in front of TV (disclaimer: he's usually in the kindergarten during work hours, but is being ill for a week; we don't keep him in front of screen all day usually)

Mods infringed on patent by returning TRUE

[thegnu]

His statement wouldn't have infringed had it returned false. Sue the Mods!

nope! no irony!

[thegnu]

Just read all the posts concerning the fact that correlation doesn't equal causation. There are people who aren't Christian who are unscientific, and people who are Christian who are scientific.

When I was a kid my friends dad, a Christian, worked in robotics. He had signed a confidentiality agreement and couldn't discuss them, so maybe he was making robots do the work of Jesus, but I highly doubt it.

They're probably right

[Anonymous Coward]

I better go stop reading slashdot and go study calculus.

Gaming for fun and profit.

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes you did phrase it badly. Read some of the books on game development. One of the things suggested is playing a wide variety of games. Also what I think some are forgetting. There are lots of OTHER jobs in the gaming industry besides programming. Give those a try.

Momma,

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't let your kids grow up to be serial killers.

All things in moderation....

[technojunkie]

We feel that, due to the ease and number of ways that unsuitable information can be presented to our children on the Internet, computers should not be in our childrens bedrooms - they are used in common areas where usage can be monitored. We don't hover, but they ask before they go somewhere other than normal - clicking links and such. My wife and I help with searches to ensure that inapprpropriate links are not followed. The kids (12, 5, and 2) regularly compete for time on the machines (although we have 4 PCs, they don't like the laptops...) to play reading and math games. Our kindergardener is reading and sounding out big words and recognizing smaller words better every day. Reader Rabbit seem to be a benefit, in my opinion. So, to summarize in a couple of pity quotes... It's not what you have but how you use it - and too much of anything is not healthy.

Re:Hrmm, there are definite benefits.

[museumpeace]

I have a boy who made it into college inspite of having the least legible handwriting I have ever seen. in high school the teacher's were distraught over flunking a kid they knew was fairly bright...they urged us to get him a lap top for homework and taking notes. Keyboards are instinctive to him, piano or qwerty.
As to the question in the article: I think the impact of the computer depends largely on the nature and talents of the child. We are now up to 6 computers, one with two NICs for firewall duties and 5 on ethernet hub behind the firewall...my non-geek artistically inclined son with the perfect penmanship insists on a Mac and churns out well researched history papers...and complains loudly if internet service is disrupted [and yes, IM supports an invisible virtual neighborhood vital to him, unknown to me]. He just got into NYU. An older sister hated computers and suffered when mom and dad, a couple of SW engineers, sent her to computer camp one summer. She wouldn't use a computer for anything until her junior year at UC Berkeley. But she certainly overcame the bad experience. That was years ago but now she's downloading BIOS upgrades for her lap top so she could install Win2K Pro on it. She accepted the computer becasue if you live a mobile life, a computer is the only way you are going to have a permanent address.]
All different as can be and NONE hurt by their experience with computers. A computer is just a video game or mp3 player if thats all you want and there is no household work ethic...or its a great mind appliance and communication tool if the household mantra is "you can suck or you can do your homework...your choice WHEN YOU MOVE OUT"

Christian Science. An oxymoron.

[Martin Spamer]

Given the poor quality of most Christian science, c.f. Creationism, can we really expect them to present an unbiased perspective on the net. I dont think so, what surprises me is that this is being accepted at face value by most posters, when there is tons of research that says the exact opposite.

Games improve hand eye coordination.
Computers use improves reading & Social skills
Games improve physiological and psychological responses
Games improve productivity and job satisfaction
Computer games improve childrens listening skill.

BTW, this post will probably be illegal in the UK tomorrow, when it will be made illegal to criticise religion.

Cool

[shurdeek]

Cool. I must obviously be a complete academic moron, because I have 8 computers in my dorm room and 2 more in front of it. And I didn't even count the playstation and the 2 servers in the network center.

Academic Work is the Problem not Computers

[Bapu]

A revolution in teaching will be required before students begin to be taught what they really need to know. Virtually none of the teaching methods used outside of maths and hard sciences in the last century are applicable to the age of the Internet.
Looking at this survey, the academic training done in the schools that the examined students attended is largely irrelevant to today's learners. The most relevant type of leaning revolves around learning to use the tools available to locate the information you need in the shortest period of time. In the past this naturally involved committing to memory large amounts of information since the human memory was the most reliable and quickest storage medium available.
In the age of the Internet, the amount of information you can recall in a few seconds is not as important as how quickly you can recover information online. Memorizing the paths to information is more important than knowing the information itself. So the human memory is best used as an index not a repository.
Until academia catches up with this idea, those who are most literate in the use of technology may display lower test scores when isolated from their online reference library. But when allowed to use the tools they have mastered to accomplish the same tasks, they will have higher test scores than those who rely only on memory for recall.
This does not excuse us in the specific disciplines of math and the scientific method. Every student must learn math the hard way or be forever isolated from the most advanced fields of human knowledge. And most important of all is learning to reason properly.
Every student must be able to form hypotheses, test, and discard unproven or unprovable ideas in favor of those that can be demonstrated to not be false.

My kid and computers

[jcdick1]

I have a four year old who loves to use the "Jumpstart" software. I think its great stuff.

That being said, I know that there is going to be serious contention in my home as he gets older, because in answer to the question of how to deal with the computers, its pretty much a given that he won't have a computer in his room, nor will he have a TV or telephone. That may be an issue for him as a teenager, but I don't want him staying up late on IM, talking on the phone, or watching bad infomercials at 2:00am. But just in case, I have Squid-guard ready, and he is going to learn his own ID and PW, with Squidguard doing its thing, too. And the firewall in place, blocking both incoming and outgoing. If he's IMing, I will know who he is talking to. If he's file-sharing, I am going to do my best to know what he's sharing. Logs, firewalls, proxy servers.

I don't like the idea of any sort of censorship on the Internet. Its *my* job, not that of any government, to protect my kid from the "bad stuff" out there. Perhaps I am more technically saavy than other parents, but its the parents job to learn. I didn't go to school for this. I was a theatre major! Take the class at your community college or adult ed program.

Is he going to try to circumvent all this? Most certainly. Am I going to try to keep one step ahead? Definitely.

When he is on the computer, I am going to know what he's doing. Typing papers, doing research. Email, but I will know to whom. When he gets older, and shows maturity and such, we can talk about relaxed access to the computer, just like we can talk about later curfews for his dates. And games will be played when the homework is done.

powerpoint

[rpillala]

Many of my fellow high school teachers enroll in "technology in education" classes where they learn to use powerpoint. They then create powerpoint presentations to teach their students how to make powerpoint presentations about what they've learned. I think by now it's widely known that powerpoint is the destroyer of minds.

The presentation itself isn't at fault, it's the presenter's belief that the machine is doing any of their work. No one should just present slides and read them to you, even if the slides do contain animated effects. In a larger sense, when teachers try to substitute instructional software for their own instruction I think kids suffer.

Re:powerpoint

[Dijital]

I see this a lot in corporate training... our trainer likes to make presentations, and then read them verbatim to us. Someday, I'd like to get up, and walk away, stating simply, "I can read, thank you. Just send me your slides when you're done."

Obligatory Joke

[SeanDuggan]

Damn shiftless linguists...

go ahead, keep fooling yourselves

[cascadingstylesheet]

Every time this topic comes up, the denial machine kicks into full gear.

Whether you like it or not, this is what happens when lots of kids have lots of access to lots of computers; in the real world. List all the exceptions that you want, blame bad parenting and teaching, say "well if you use them this way (i.e. not the way people statistically actually use them), it's fine", blah, blah. That won't change the reality.

Andreyw, Ingnore this Pedant

[virg_mattes]

> In the future I suggest you skip the Mathematics and pay more attention to English. For someone purporting to be clever your use of the language is utterly abysmal.

Sorry, sir (or madam), but although his writing is very conversational, it's not abysmal at all. I suspect he writes like he speaks, but that's not wrong even in academic terms if the venue is informal, which this venue is. Maybe you should post less on Slashdot so you can concentrate on refining your manners.

Virg

Latest PISA study puts Finland on top, though

[Anonymous Coward]

The BBC reports that Finland tops the list in the international PISA comparison of education. From the article: "The focus of the 2003 study was mathematics, with problems mainly set in real-world situations, covering space and shape, change and relationships, quantity and uncertainty.

Computers have been involved in education for ages here and a large chunk of the population are fluent with using them for real-life, everyday tasks.

Whatever this implies, I have no idea ; )

J

Computers are pretty much idiot proof now...

[DarthVain]

My only comment is, I had many computers growning up (not all at once).I started on a TRS80 (if you can even call that a computer), a VIC20 and what I consider my first real computer which was a 286 clone. The thing back then is that compaired to today, computers really didn't work all that well. What I mean by this is that you could not take things for granted and everything was not automatic. More often than not you had to do a lot of friging around to get things to work. It could be that you had to alter Modem connect strings, maybe play with XMS/EMS memory, DOS batch files, etc... and that was just to get Kings Quest working! All I am saying with the older computers that probably most of us grew up with, it took a fair bit of learning just to use the damn things. In order to do the things we wanted to do (for me it was mostlt playing PC games and connecting to BBS's), you had to leard stuff to do it. Today computers come in a box and are easy to use as a console. They could be used as overpowered xboxs which while fun, isn't so educational. Anyway thats my 2 cents.
DarthVain

My experiances

[Tylerious]

I'm probably at or slightly above the age this is referring to. I have almost constant computer access with a family desktop and a school laptop. My (high) school issues computers to all the students and I'm very concerned about how it is affecting people's grades. The right to have incredible information access is frequently abused, regardless of internet filters and the like. I do not, however, feel that the blame rests with the computers. It is rather that the abuse of students may result in lower grades. As of right now, there is no current correlation at my school between grades and computers. Unfortunately, it is pretty difficult to manage computer abuse. But don't blame to computers. It's like blaming cake for making people fat.

Re:Bullshit -- They don't like the computers becau

[PzkAusf2]

Do some research first. Christian Science Monitor is a misleading name. It has little to do with science and absolutely nothing to do with Christianity. In fact, CSM leans toward the left politically. Although I have not actually seen an explicit endorsement from them, they appear to favor the more liberal members of the Democratic Party. Don't take my word for it. Go look at their site. csmonitor.com

Gotta beg to differ

[johnmig]

I agree that parenting is not a spectator sport, you've got to roll up your sleeves and get involved every single day. It is not for the faint of heart.

That being said, I've got to disagree with your blanket statement: "There's an easy check to see if someone has done a poor job of parenting (in 75% of the cases): see if one of their kids has a TV, phone, gaming console, or computer in their own room (extra points if they have more than one)." By your definition I'm a bad parent, as both my sons have a computer in their rooms. Both boys have excellent grades at a difficult high school, play sports, referee, are deeply involved in their church youth group, volunteer, play guitar and sax, and have active social lives. Their computers are usually on, and a chat client is going; but they have learned to prioritize their time. Homework MUST get done; no ifs, ands, or buts. The doors to their rooms are open, and I drop in several times a night to see what's up and to chat.

Their computers were a reward for getting straight A's for a year. We made a deal, and they fulfilled their part, so I fulfilled my part. I have to say that while they do play games on them, this only done a minority of the time; they more typically are using them for homework, music, or art.

So, please don't judge me as a bad parent unless you actually have data to suggest that I am one.

Funny, But...

[virg_mattes]

> How am I going to climb the clock tower if I can't climb a tree?

Potential valedictorians should know that while trees are seldom fitted with stairs, clock towers usually are.

Carry on.

Virg

Fair enough, their claim is still crap though.

[PotatoHead]

I will have a look again, but I must say my experience was different.

In other news..

[Raunch]

There is a correlation between having chain saws and chainsaw accidents, between having telephones and wasting time gossiping, between doors and fingers slammed in doors. On a more personal note, also between posting on /. and not getting any work done.

What is so sensational about a tool that can be used both positively and negatively.

Child's Computer Use = Academics

[INetEngineer]

My step-son's use of the computer is limited to academics. Once in a GREAT while, he is allowed to search online for his hobby, drawing. He's allowed to play his XBox only on the weekends. During the weekdays, he's limited to his academics, chores, hobbies, and spending time outside.

Make 'em turn it off.

[CreatureComfort]

Six working computers in the house, 1 Linux Server, 1 OpenBSD. Four people in the house over age 3.

I make my 12 y.o., straight A student, son turn his computer off regularly. It's the only way I can get him to come show me how to get past those really hard missions in GTA:SA...

But He Didn't...

[virg_mattes]

> But you should not dismiss the study based on the experience of your one daughter.

But he didn't do that. He did it on the basis of everyone in his local environs, as he stated in the follow-up post. Still, it goes to the center when you say:

I wouldn't draw any conclusions from this study unless I were qualified to and saw the hard data.

Neither he nor I are willing to assume we're unqualified to draw conclusions, and it's too bad that you seem to think you are. Social sciences are still nascent enough that anyone who thinks they can draw definitive results from a given study is more foolish than those of us who draw conclusions without deep study into social sciences. So, in reply to your statement, I can do better than simply reserving judgement. I can reject the causation hypothesis until there's something more definitive than was put forward by the study.

Virg

Research, People!

[virg_mattes]

The Christian Science Monitor, while being founded by Mary Baker Eddy, has shown itself to be a very secularly-based news source, with no strong agenda toward any religion. Google it and you'll see. You should still take the study with a grain of salt (as you should any news article), but not that particular grain of salt.

Virg

Re:Research, People!

[syousef]

The CSM tries to appear even handed and does give both sides on arguments such as evolution. But in all honesty if it was aiming to be a secular and unbiased scientific magazine the very first thing the publication's staff would do is change its name.

Sigh...

[virg_mattes]

> Ok, so a group titled "Christian Science Monitor" is against computer profliferation.

Incorrect in two ways. Firstly, the Christian Science Monitor is simply a newspaper. It was founded by Mary Baker Eddy, who insisted on the name, but has since become just a newspaper, and a rather good one, by all accounts. It is not the reporting arm of the Church of Christ, Scientist, and hasn't been since its inception.

Second, the report did not state that any group is against computer proliferation. They reported the results of a study that found a correlation between computer use in kids and scholastic performance. They didn't even editorialize in the article. You might try reading it.

Virg

cruel and unusual punishment

[crabpeople]

i just wanted to add one little thing.

your children will be messed up my friend. its the same thing i see in home schooled children. they lead such sheltered lives that when they finaly do get a chance to see the real "colours" of the world, watch out. they will either be over-indulgists to the extreme, or completly sheltered and represed, ostracised from their peers and society in general.

you have to give your children some level of socialization, and seriously, moulding them like little puppets only works until about 13 or 14.

you are just about the worst parent i have ever heard of. kids need to be kids. not future doctors of tommorrow, or future investors. honestly I think what you are doing to your poor daughter is sick. no excessive volume indoors? tv channels all blocked?

wow. i kind of support no TV when your older, i dont have a TV and really dont need one. But no tv for KIDS?? most tv is crap yes, but if their friends watch it, how do you expect them to relate to others? i would say that making children social is WAY more important than making them successful. your resume gets you in the door, but your interpersonal relations seal the deal. will your child ever question authority? is that what you WANT??

homer: hey flanders i thought you had a satellite dish.
ned: yup, 250 channels -- all locked out.

Yoda talk?

[KevinDumpsCore]

Still, English has been moving since Old English from a tense and ending based grammar and towards a word order based grammar (think of how weird "yoda talk" seems, even when it isn't technically grammatically incorrect, and understand it just fine you can)

Frustrated it makes me. Understand it, I do not.

Another Day, Another Page

[XFilesFMDS1013]

...That I can't let my parents see. Great, juusst GREAT.

The guy IS an idiot.

[Anonymous Coward]

En tee.

Not just at home

[Reziac]

From TFA:

"And while students seemed to benefit from limited use of computers at school, those who used them several times per week at school saw their academic performance decline significantly as well."

I suspect the reason is because computers are more often used, both by teachers and by students, as a way of INDEXING DATA, rather than LEARNING STUFF.

It's all well and good to know where to find everything, but it does you no good if you don't know how to process the information once you've got it. And I think that is probably what is happening. Instead of learning the basics as they would by interacting with a teacher, average kids who use computers at school learn where to FIND the basics.

This is very much akin to the ongoing /. debate about geeks vs lusers [term used for this discussion; I don't personally believe that mere everyday users are "lusers"]. A geek has actually LEARNED not only how to find stuff on their computer, but also how to build it, set it up and secure it, why stuff works how it does, etc. A luser only knows superficial use of everyday apps, but nothing about how the computer works.

Computer-oriented schooling may well be raising a generation of informational lusers, who know how to FIND data, but nothing about how to USE it or what it MEANS.

To rephrase somewhat...

[Reziac]

Most kids will spend time reading "Monster Truck Mash-azine" and therefore do poorer than the few kids who read "Scientific American". Therefore, magazines are bad for a majority of children.

Keep it away ?

[Paul_Roux]

What I understand from many is that the parents have control over what their children do with their computers. I was in the same situation and we only have a Computer in the office, which was next to the living room.

I got fed up the ultimate powers of control that my parents held of this machine and after a year of saving up I bought my own computer. Problem solved. Their supreme powers of control over how I waste my time was rendered useless.

This was much inspired by my parent's unwillingness to buy me TV games at the age of 12. So I got them myself. Many a day was utterly wasted with that Nintendo. But that is why we live - to waste our time with things that makes us happy.

I quote police chief Wiggum from the Simpsons : "I say if it feels good, do it". And he is a cop, so we should listen to him. (Just look at how TV games have corrupted my mind into blending reality with cartoons...)