Slashdot Mirror
College Freshmen Struggle With Tech Literacy
snow_man writes to mention an article on the E-Commerce News site about techno-literacy problems with incoming college freshmen. Some schools, like CSU, are planning on including a technology comprehension test alongside their English and Math evaluations for new students. From the article: "Not all of Generation M can synthesize the loads of information they're accessing, educators say. 'They're geeky, but they don't know what to do with their geekdom,' said Barbara O'Connor, a Sacramento State communications studies professor involved in a nationwide effort to hone students' computer-research skills. On a recent nationwide test to measure their technological 'literacy' -- their ability to use the Internet to complete class assignments -- only 49 percent of the test-takers correctly evaluated a set of Web sites for objectivity, authority and timeliness. Only 35 percent could correctly narrow an overly broad Internet search."
At first I suspected it was because I've been doing searches since the days of archie. But more and more I've come to realize that some people just have no skill when it comes to doing a web search. I think it's primarily due to poor reading comprehension and poor reading speed.
These people who can't do searches, they click on results where the summary clearly shows that it is not the desired material. If they had read every word, it would have been clear.
It's a basic literacy problem. Americans have really poor literacy. The destruction of the concept that parents should educate their children, combined with an increasingly poor public education system, has left us with a generation too illiterate to do a web search.
This sort of topic has come up before, and the conclusion that should be drawn is the same -- this situation has little to do with technology, and a lot to do with lack of basic critical thinking skills.
As long as US schools (for what it's worth, I don't necessarily know if it's a lot better elsewhere) continue to fail in teaching critical thinking skills properly, early enough to make a difference that is, then people will continue to be clueless when it comes to the sort of problems highlighted. Again, it's not a technology problem, but an educational one, which in fact is basically a symptom of the current values of our society and their effect on education. But that's another story altogether...
"They're geeky, but they don't know what to do with their geekdom," then... "They take at face value whatever shows up at the top of the list as the best stuff." Does "geeky" mean "1337 skr1p7 k1dd13" to these people? Because that's about what comes to mind when I read this.
Care about privacy? Read this!
Generation M is what? I thought Generation Z was up next. At least, it's not Generation 2.0+ (TM).
What is so hard about "porn -midget -horse -gay"?
I once worked in a campus computer lab, and was amazed at the lack of technical literacy among some students. I watched one girl struggle with Internet Explorer crashing, and I told her to try Safari (the lab had all Macs), and she acted surprised. "You mean that I can access the Web without using the Internet?"
:-)
Then I'd turn around and watch some middle-aged ladies (this was at a community college) whiz through Photoshop.
I would be surprised if freshmen were much better at evaluating and weighing objectivity and authority in traditional sources such as books, journals, and newspapers.
And I would like to know the criteria for the "correct" evaluation of the objectivity and authority of these sources.
"Only 35 percent could narrow an overly broad internet search"
Yeah, and what percent of incoming freshmen new how to narrow an overly broad search using whatever ancient, proprietary electronic card catalog system the school useswithout being taught? Probably less than 35%.
I swear this was posted a few months ago, but it seems this particular article is new.
Sadly, however, it is not techno-literacy that's the problem. The real problem is that I know people who have come out of graduate programs who can't write a letter. When I was in university, I would easily say that seventy-five percent of my graduating class could not write a proper thesis statement, to say nothing of any particular other style that might be required.
Let's not screw around with these modern ideas of technology- we have to go back to the basics; reading and writing. Let's make sure people can read a newspaper before we ask them to read code. Let's make sure they can multiply before we ask them to write it. Our society depends on these things. Not knowing how to find the 'start' button or what a network stack is lags an extremely distant third, if at all.
"It is possible to commit no errors and still lose. That is not a weakness. That is life." -Peak Performance
I understand all that, but could someone please help me with this assignment. I should write a C-program which sorts array elements in alphabetical descending order. I tried googling already, but failed and thought that I should ask Slashdot. So please help me, ASAP!
I thought we already had this discussion last month.
"Avoid employing unlucky people - throw half of the pile of CVs in the bin without reading them." -- David Brent
Is it really too much to ask to actually write out the full names of universities? I realize it's a short way into the article, but seriously. I live in Ohio. CSU is Cleveland State, to me. KSU is Kent State. Elsewhere, KSU might be Kansas State (and is, as far as domains go), and CSU is apparently California... but especially as summaries go, I can't psychically know that you mean California. USC is more commonly the University of Southern California... but it's also the University of South Carolina.
Nobody's fingers are at risk of falling off from those few additional letters, are they?
I know, it's not *that* important, but it makes me peevish.
They can only play games. As soon as WOW has a COBOL interface, things will change.
Could it be that most students today have no ability to critically think? When I took a Poli Sci class to see how the other half lived in college, I wasn't surprised. I was met by peers who were largely spoon-fed political propaganda and could regurgitate it, but couldn't actually rationally justify it. For me it was like clubbing baby seals because I have frequently subjected my own views to a level of introspection that they would never do.
Why doesn't this surprise me? Because the public schools don't teach a bloody thing anymore unless you live in a rich district. Even there, they generally teach only math or science very well. There are some very worthy things about the classical education model with its three phases which happen to correspond pretty closely with recently observed brain development in most people.
Satan, or Bush, has taken over the public information channels, and the minds of the young and stupid.
Oh, come on. Try again: MTV, YouTube, and every other attention-span killing, passive-consumption bit of fluff and sound-bite-world-view bling-bling = self-worth bit of nonsense is where this comes from. Whether one politician or idealogy takes hold because kids are just skulls full of goo is a separate issue. Whether it's Rosie O'Donnel's witless rants that resonate, or some preacher's feel-goodiness, it's the lack of critical thinking skills (which should be introduced by parents and polished in school) that have created this intellectual wasteland.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Informational technology is still very new; it's the equivalent of an unfinished ancient chipping stone to modern cooking devices like microwaves. I'm not surprised that most of the people in the world (which apparently some countries still use stones and such) finds the computer internet beyond practical use. I'm not surprised because i'm in csc and hardly know what they do. :)
- Dan Rather's debacle with the Word documents
- 920 Reuters images being pulled because they're suspected of being altered
- the Jayson Blair situation over the course of many years
The point is, adults in this nation think these traditional institutions are objective, so why are we faulting the youth for their assumptions?The article is talking about California State University. I personally go to Colorado State University and this sort of confused me. There is more than one CSU in the USA; thanks for the ambiguity submitter!
Maybe they just are smarter and have better communication skills.
Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
What truth?
There is no dupe
Is there anywhere that slashdotters can have a go at the test, so we know just what the results mean?
Video Production Support
That's the entire problem right there. People have come to expect that the government is going to do that job [educate their children] for them, ...
/The Underground History of American Education/, and The Seven Lesson Schoolteacher.
Ah yes, the classic bait-and-switch technique. Government: "we're going to educate the children now, so every child gets a chance at developing to their full potential." Meanwhile, they're building an alternate set of "education railroad tracks" that lead to a land where illiteracy is the norm and 'the masses' (We the People) are easy to trick and control. Government goons take over the train's engine and throw the switch, all while proclaiming that all their schools need are a few superficial fixes to make them work right.
Maybe if I hadn't wasted all that time in the government's schools my analogy would be more coherent. John Gatto is very articulate in his trashing of the government school concept. Be sure to read (if you can, that is)
Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
www.teslabox.com
What on Earth does Technological Literacy have to do with being able to evaluate a web site's authority and timeliness?
Seriously, that's more of library science issue, or whatever you call it. Technological literacy is the ability to use technology to get stuff done. Website criticism isn't really much part of that.
Well, I am still a virgin though I built up a D-II Sourceress to upper 60 as a freshman.
:-)
Just a year out of college I started off at 80k/year. And I am still a geek, but...
When I do find a girl I care about, I would be able to buy her 100 white orchids, hand delivered. Every day. Until she lets me take her on a helicopter ride. To a private jet. To Paris. Where she gets a burger and a large coke, and some fries at their local McDonnlds. And a diamond ring (the kind some will never afford). And we spend the night at my future beachside villa in Cannes
And in the morning I will get an artist to paint a cubist portret of her, in the nude. On the bed of magnolia petals.
And I won't have to worry how to make my food stamps last for a week so that I can deposit that $180 so that my check doesn't bounce. And how my idea of a night out would be getting a sixpack, watching "the game", then fucking the pig I live with for 2 mins.
It sucks that I still get to pay all that welfare for the bastard children of the guys that spent their college years fucking, doing drugs, and destroying their brain.
"At first I suspected it was because I've been doing searches since the days of archie. But more and more I've come to realize that some people just have no skill when it comes to doing a web search. I think it's primarily due to poor reading comprehension and poor reading speed."
They'd fit in here.
"These people who can't do searches, they click on results where the summary clearly shows that it is not the desired material. If they had read every word, it would have been clear."
Clicked on any slashdot articles lately?
"It's a basic literacy problem. Americans have really poor literacy. The destruction of the concept that parents should educate their children, combined with an increasingly poor public education system, has left us with a generation too illiterate to do a web search."
What makes you think it's JUST a US problem?
Because a gay horse wouldn't be interested in midget porn.
I be to differ with you. I think it's a problem of "No Child left behind." This policy leads to teachers "faking" results to get more funding and the deadly "I co not care attitude", which kills morale.
And just like Crack Cocaine, computers have no business whatsoever in colleges or schools. Their use should definatly not be mandatory to complete a non-computer related class.
I'm not a ludite, I just learned the hard way, after 30 years of hardcore computer addiction. They will f*** you up. Staring at a 2d desktop screen all day will seriously dissociate you from reality, and you will lose lots of skills you take for granted. Starting with the social ones first. Staring at a computer screen for hours on end is not normal nor healthy.
Nothing wrong with pen and paper. Its reliable and worked well for thousands of years. CD roms lasts maybe 20 years at the most. Harddrives maybe 10. Some paper has lasted 2000 years. No electricity nor toxic chemicals required. No OS's to crash, no drivers to update, no software to install, nothing to go obsolete. Portable, durable, always on.
yup, the ICT Literacy Assessment was smacked around a month or so back. the notable bit in the article is a school (probably) requiring it as an assessment tool.
i am snow. fear me.
i included [California State University at Sacramento] in my submission but it was modded out. dammit.
i am snow. fear me.
It sucks that I still get to pay all that welfare for the bastard children of the guys that spent their college years fucking, doing drugs, and destroying their brain.
:P ::ducks::
Hey, those arts majors aren't so bad. Remember, part of that welfare pays them to flip our burgers.
FTA:
WTF does one's ability to use the Internet to complete assignments have to do with technological literacy? The fact that without computers we wouldn't have the Internet?
These same people that can't narrow down their Google searches would be lost doing research at a library.
--
On a slightly different note, I have some concerns about such testing and these articles. Having taught IT classes for 2 1/2 years, I can tell you that early on it's VERY difficult to tell who will effectively absorb the material. For many, it would take at least 1-2 classes for them to become comfortable with the type of information they'd have to absorb.
I still remember being lost at the DOS command prompt during my first programming class in college. It wasn't till some time AFTER this class that I felt comfortable working at a command prompt. Despite being clueless about DOS, I did well in the class. It wasn't until about a year later that I finally realized I should be working with computers.
I was an engineering student; therefore, I had to take a programming class my first semester. Two or three semesters later, one of my engineering classes required that two of the assignments be completed in a bona fide programming language. So, I fished out my old Turbo Pascal textbook, refreshed my programming knowledge and completed the assignment with ease. And yet, it STILL didn't dawn on me that I had chosen the wrong major. It wasn't until a good friend of mine in the same class pointed out that I completed the assignment much faster then her and, most importantly, that I actually enjoyed the assignment.
To make a long story short, I couldn't change my major. However, I did cram as many computer courses into my schedule as I was allowed, and spent a lot of my free time (i.e. time I should've spent doing my homework) teaching myself about computers. I'm now a programmer and love to teach people that are truly interested in learning how to use their computers. Too many people expect computers, and the Internet, to be as easy as popping in a tape and pushing play on the VCR....er, DVD. (Wow, I'm getting old.)
The three points I'm trying to make:
1) It can take someone a while to get comfortable with something completely new. I even had the benefit of owning a Comodore 64 as a youngster and doing some very basic BASIC programming on it. (Pun intended) However, I was very young. Most of the time, I spent playing video games on it.
2) It's not about the specific technical skills. It's about the THINKING skills.
And, most importantly...
3) It's about the INTEREST. Too many kids these days lack any in interest in learning.
----
At any rate, I'm saddened by the fact that some our educators link technical literacy with one's ability to evaluate a website's "objectivity, authority and timeliness." I hope such testing isn't used to weed people out of technical majors.
Uh, huh. And how is computer addiction any different than any other addiction? And what does that do to your "doing without" premise?
I work at a university, and we recently came up with a "KnowIT Program.". This program teaches digital literacy (defined as: "helping students learn how to use multiple computer tools effectively), and has a specific set of goals: It's been surprisingly difficult to get students to attend anything that we offer; our hands-on sessions (Quick Classes), computer-based training (through Skillsoft CBT), and live orientation sessions, are all pretty much empty. Students simply just don't care about digital literacy. They think that they know everything that they need to know about computers, and/or just don't care about learning more.
Sacramento State is not exactly known for its brilliant students. If you drive down I-80 to UC Davis, or a little farther to California, you'll find more students who *can* program their VCR (or TiVo, or download shows using bitTorrent).
Generation M is the Internet generation.
I'm a college freshman (technically a sophomore, but thats only because I was a dual credit student in High-School), and I just so happen to work for one of the major advertisers for slashdot. I won't name the company, because I don't want to have them come off as hiring know-nothings. Maybe I'm one of the few 18 year olds who can administrate Linux servers? If anything, to me this article is nothing but flamebait, or trolling. Maybe my generation is completely flawed, but surely we know how to use a search engine? If in fact this study is accurate, I'm glad, because it only means that I'll still have a tech job in 10 years.
- Aetheral Research -
All they'll do is take that one MS Office course and make it a requirement for all students. That'll teach 'em all about technology! Lazyness: 1; Everyone else: 0.
I'm not sure if I understand what you consider technical literacy, apologies if I misunderstood.
"Technical Literacy" does not involve the sort of things you would run into in a CS or EE class, nor does it involve IT topics such as installing drivers, etc. "Technical Literacy" is being able to do the very basic through technical means, at least to me. This does involve evaluating a website's "objectivity, authority and timeliness.", just as in the dark ages (when I was in school) and we were expected to do the same with books, magazines, newspapers, etc. Other than learning to do a google search rather than learning the Dewey Decimal System I think there is a lot of overlap. If a person can do some research using the web (using the previous criteria), write an essay on a topic, and do some math in a spreadsheet I'd say they are technically literate.
That said, I think computers are highly overrated with respect to education. They are a "buzzword", a budget justifier, a crutch or excuse, etc. Sure put one or two in each class, more in the school library, but it would be better to give each child a couple pencils and a pad of paper than a laptop.
Have a look here , referred to at Slashdot here.
:-)
Insert
Maybe because they're too busy playing stuff like this:
http://slavehack.com/creaturehouse/?look=2201
Evaluating information for objectivity, authority, and timeliness is a fundamental skill that's lacking, and it has nothing to do with the medium used to obtain the information. Look at how few people are able to read a newspaper or magazine objectively. Look at how many people, for example, think Fox news is real, unbiased, fair journalism. Thats SCARY.
So it turns out people are equally poor at this skill when using the internet, as they are when using the television, newspapers, books, magazines, or word of mouth. Okay, that's not surprising at all. Why should that make a difference.
That said, this is a problem and something should be done about it. But it's a mistake to characterize it as a problem with tech literacy. Tech literacy would be the inability to actually use the technology to sort the information. The article indicates that students have no trouble with this, rather with the more traditional cognitive skills.
Unfortunately closed minded groups and certain people have a bit of an agenda that isnt simply "find the truth".
The first one may be a clear given, the third one politically motivated but still within the ballpark, but the second one regarding Reuters shows the true colors of who the critics are(and how they slant).
That is, Pajamas Media (the group associated with most of the criticism) has too much of a country club, right-wing, and pro-Israel slant(and does not mind showing it in the case of LGF). It continues on from LGF to Michelle Malkin who seems to get the idea that she is to dish but not take criticism(see all her entries that haven't yet been banned and see the "comments disabled"). This continues on to HotAir, also known as A**ahpundit, where they take on the unofficial policy that is summarized as "We're not responsible for the comments, but existence isnt guaranteed". While these may be the flagrant offenders, others may take parts of that policy; the constant is that they declare themselves holier than the "MSM".
If there's anything to be learned out of that group, it's to seek information that is factual, and has enough proof to make multiple opposing sides agree on the course of events. Otherwise, I'd rather read them, and then take a more serious look at those who allow a more open dialogue to see what pans out. If they're just going to delete and demonize the opposition, they're just speaking to the choir. In cases such as Reuters, I'd rather hear the objection come from someone who at least doesn't rely on hiding behind the "private group" defense to justify their objections to criticism.
Before those who support those groups say that "the other does it as well"- yes, it happens. However, such actions appear on a regular basis with such groups as Pajamas Media, and that they do so blatantly enough to make it a sign of their presence. Their policy and protocol is something that requires one to take their opinions a very large cube of salt before believing.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
I always see people complaining about how students are dumber and dumber every year. Doing so is largely a part of the teaching process but there might be some truth in it.
The problem is the average level of formal education received is rising and thus it's quality has to decrease.
Unless you know the exact url, that's usually the quickest way to find a site. A notorious example: try to get the Nissan car company website in the USA.
My wife is in school, and she is one of the oldest people in class. There is about a ten-year difference between her and the rest.
The younger ones that might have had a chance tend to party a lot, and get distracted. Its that, 'hey we are in college so lets drink a lot' kinda thing. The class that she is in is 'secretary' course. She puts in a lot of extra hours that to get the marks that she did.
Quite a number of people were shocked to discover that the only people that were likely to pass were those that started working right off the bat. The Class sizes are 40 or so people, and that will cut down to 10 or 15, after this semester.
Part of what happens is the fact they open up the class to some people that probably wont make it. Just to get their money, and to maybe get them to take another different course, based on the skills that they have. A lot of people didn't realise that if they can't figure out how to do the homework, they wouldn't get a job.
I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
First we were the "Generation Y", then the "Pepsi Generation", then the "Internet Generation", now "Generation M"? Dammit, if you're going to give us some lame label, stick with one!
Lower standards! But seriously, don't you feel as though that happens? Your in class with some fairly intelligent people, and a pile of writhing idiots, and they somehow pass? I have a lot of friends that come to me for their searches, they know I can find practically anything online. The problem is searching for information is never stressed at a young age. You are presented with information in standardized book form, and despite any and all other sources, if it isn't in the book, it is an incorrect answer/solution/etc.
Kids who can't do their coursework find a search engine instead of asking for advice from the teachers, and they get sufficient answers to their queries. I spend more time showing members of staff how to perform simple tasks, like printing emails, than I do learning new things - and I'm not the only one who does.
I'm taking this "technological literacy" term to mean "can switch on PC, can log into Windows, can search Google and paste results into MS Word", because that's what research means in schools nowadays. God forbid we use books - most of them have been sold to fund the purchase of more computers, anyway.
The problem I have with the education system is the way in which students' intelligence is constantly underestimated. A 17-year-old taking ICT neither wants, nor needs to be told, how to use Microsoft's products. We know it all already, from daily use at home. I don't know what's going on in America, but it seems to be the opposite of what's happening here.
I just wish technological literacy referred to genuine knowledge of how technology works. But, evidently in the opinion of those who decide on the curriculums, kids just don't need to know such things.
Google's interface is vastly richer than most people understand. If Google created cribsheets or had better assisted help that explained the richness of their entry syntax then people would be better at using it.
Now having said that, a few other issues -
Tech literacy in schools devolves to teaching kids how to use Microsoft applications like Office. And most of the problem with that is that MS has created overly complex beasts that are hard to use in the first place. Moreover, none of them was created with a student in mind.
People have short attention spans. If you're going to force people to 'use' the internet for school work then you're going to have to get Google and their ilk to partner with schools to provide more elegant and faster and more limited results windows to students.
You are going to have to understand that just like teachers teach to the test, students use tools to answer the specific question and no more. No one, or almost no one is going to surf the web to casually learn more about Rene Decartes or the history of wool. They are looking for the answers to questions 1, 3, 7 etc. on their worksheet. And if the result could spit back the exact sentence they could then write on their sheet, that would be great.
Next you're going to have to pare down technical complexity. My flat screen TV has a 63 page users manual (just the English). My phone's user's guide is more than 240 pages. Neither of them does exactly what I want nor do they do exctly what their vast tomes of documentation say they should do. Similarly if your computer apps are buggy, broken, poorly documented or overly documented then it means you probably did a poor job yourself on the fit and finish of the apps.
Last but not least, the general interface on computers is junk. In the broader sense, it assumes that the application you had me install is very important and has to be front and center all the time. My son's computer has so many icons in the system tray I don't even know what most of them are. Why would anyone in their right mind even screw with them and risk breaking something? I wouldn't.
Do you really think "all over the world" people know what CSU means?
If you google for "CSU" the first hit is Colorado State.
Clear, Dark Skies
On a recent nationwide test to measure their technological 'literacy' -- their ability to use the Internet to complete class assignments -- only 49 percent of the test-takers correctly evaluated a set of Web sites for objectivity, authority and timeliness. Only 35 percent could correctly narrow an overly broad Internet search.
If you think that's bad, just wait for Generation W(ikipedia). Ignorance is strength.
Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
Yes this is a perfect idea... And then colleges and universities should hire more CS students as TAs to teach a, "How to use your computer" class! And then we TAs get paid! Perfect!
Bad parents simply blame society for what evil their own negligence has done, assuming they even bother to raise their children in the first place. Many do not.
I do not see why other countries do not implement a system like we have in Belgium: ...). TSO is somewhere in between.
everybody gets put in the same educational system until they're 12. After that, based on your scores, you get assigned to a different type of high school. There are four types (I won't explain the abbreviation)
ASO : for the smart kids
TSO : for the average kids
BSO : for the dumber kids
BUSO : for the dumb kids (might sound bad, but half of it are retards)
Warning, gross generalization : while the kids from the ASO are prepared to go to university, the BSO kids are learning more practical things (working with metal, wood,
This system is pretty good imho, for it allows the smarter children to get attention too (and at their level), while the dumber kids get lessons that are more adapted to their level (and they are in smaller classes, mostly 8-16, while in the ASO classes always have above 20 students). This avoids the frustration that occurs when lesser intelligent kids have to learn stuff they can't grasp (and mostly they don't give a damn...), while the frustration among the intelligent kids who have to learn dumbed down things also disappears. Bullying of the "intelligent but physically weaker" nerds is also dratically reduced. One negative point though: teachers in the BSO are a lot more likely to burn out faster than their ASO counterparts.
The way I see it, the USA doesn't have such a system because it starts with the premise that every kid should get the same chances. But the way I see it: they also do in Belgium (until they are 12).
There are a million ways to get to the same results. If I don't do things the same way as you, am I wrong?
Univerities do a lot of strange stuff to get extra government funding. I am a little suspecious here.
That's not tech literacy, that's just plain literacy. Though tech literacy is lacking too ... it seems that many people are unfamiliar with Excel.
College freshmen struggle with literacy.
As do graduates.
I just checked with several variations. The most successful was
"find his way out of a paper bag" instructions
Basically there's lots of info about paper bags and what goes into them and crafty little things you can do with them.
But there is no way to google yourself out of a paper bag. Can't be done.
I can't say this is terribly surprising. There's a belief out there that computers are just one big interface, and if you can crack the interface then you understand the thing that underlies the interface. Kids these days have all mastered the art of understanding computer interfaces. Since they can remember they've been the family "computer expert" when Mom needs to find a recipe for chicken soup. "geezz mom!.. just type in google.com up in that address bar, type in "chicken soup recipe" down in that other bar, and click on those blue things". Mom thinks Jr. is some kind of frickin geniuous because he knew some small thing SHE didn't know.
Of course just because you can click the right buttons doesn't mean you know what the hell is going on. I've seen a guy that calls himself a "computer consultant" re-configure TCP/IP and not know a lick about what a router was, what an IP address is, what DNS is, what a netmask means, etc. And that'd be fine if there wasn't an assumption that you really knew what was going on. We all start out at that level, it's just most people never get any farther than being what I call a "interface jockey".
So I don't find it really surprising that this principle translates into the entire generation (and no, I don't think previous generations have been any better at the same skills). I think the lesson here is that we need to stop concentrating on the interface, and start concentrating on how to use the tool. Teaching a guy how to swing a hammer is nice and all, but it doesn't mean you know anything about building a fence. Similarly knowing how to do a web search is useless unless you know how to seperate good sources from bad, narrow your search, define your problem, learn how to refine your search through what you've learned, etc.
AccountKiller
As all people know, the problem lies in education.
I am a teacher, so let me be the first to say, higher pay (as nice as it would be) is not the answer. Just what would the higher pay attract? More skilled people whose skills would be used where? What part of the high school curriculum needs an expert in the field? It can't be in the actual subject matter; where anyone with advanced knowledge would have be dumned down to be compatible with the rest of the kids. Sure, you might need a couple experts to write guidelines or the curriculum, but it's not required for the average teacher.
If anything, I'd much rather have the money spent on hiring teaching assistants to help with class discipline and kids with special needs. Sad fact is 99% of a teachers job is spent trying to think of things to keep the kids occupied than on actually teaching them, because the kids have no discipline. Not to mention teaching to a curriculum that is just not kept on par with grade promotion. You can't focus on this year's curriculum because they didn't learn half of what they were supposed to learn from last years curriculum. Yeah, we should fail half the class; but you can't do that.
They will not get the benefit of education without first wanting to learn. It's just amazing how many kids in high school still think they're doing the teacher a favor by coming to class. I could see that behavior in elementary school...but it's totally unacceptable in high school. But you can't blame half the kids. Many of them come from broken homes..parents who don't give a rats behind...over protective parents.
You want a solution.
1. Fix the social problems in general.
2. More teaching assistants.
3. Place kids in streams earlier and enforce the limits heavily.
People complain about the public schools failing children,
instead they should look at the results - and then reverse engineer what the schools are actually creating:
Not-So-Bright, unquestioningly patriotic (or equally un-American), sports fans who can't read a map and barely speak one language (with some reading and poor spelling skills).
Children are guided into careers - becoming robotic automatons for corporations,
when learning to build up their own business and help grow and support a just community are equally if not more important to becoming a simple economic consumer. Not to mention guiding children into young adulthood - forming solid married families producing successful offspring of their own!
On top of the USA dismal performance with education (when compared to foreign schools),
the universities keep increasing tuition for product that hasn't changed much over the years (except technology).
On-Line classes still leave a lot to be desired, and yet cost as much or more than the brick and mortar counterparts.
Home schooling by qualified people with advanced resources is best - as long as the children can become part of a social community for activities.
Single parent, two job holding people are having a hell of a time raising kids, who raise themselves with what they can learn from their peers.
Constantly focusing education to 'teach to the test' format is not as successful as involving students on meaningful projects where learning and skills produce something they can take home to their families.
True, dat. A couple two-three weeks ago, CmdrTaco be touchin my junk!
I'm reminded of the time I was an aide in my high school's computer lab. Usually the lab was used for drafting and design classes, so you'd expect the kids to have some experience with computers (if you've got to learn AutoCAD, you already know some basic functions).
So one day the teacher in charge asks me to help one student that is trying to log in. He can't figure out what the problem is, and the teacher doesn't want to fix it until he knows what is going on.
I go over there, and the kid just sits there, staring at the login screen. He asks me what to do, so I just read the screen to him; "Enter your username. Enter your password. Click OK." Pretty soon a window pops up that says "incorrect password."
So this kid isn't using the right password, and he can't figure it out even though it says so right on the screen. After I see the message, I try to inform him: "It looks like you don't know your password." The kid hears this and gets angry, "Yes, that IS my password." Actually, it's not his password--the proof was right on the screen. Upon hearing his complaint, I quickly rephrase my statement: "Oh, I'm sorry... the computer doesn't know your password." That makes sense to him, and I go have the password reset by the administrator.
True, lots of people are not "technologically literate" or whatever, but I think for a lot of people the problem is a little deeper than the mere fact that a computer was involved.
Not all of Generation M can synthesize the loads of information they're accessing, educators say.
Even the complainant can't use tech words correctly. One suitable word would be assimilate.
Yeah, I know I'm a pedant, but educators should know which word to pick...
Your point of view on the, "raise their wages" chorus is refreshing. But I'm curious what you think of the second part of the song, "shrink class sizes"? Do you think students would have a better chance of learning more/better/faster?
i am snow. fear me.
I like it. CS geeks being forced to communicate with humans is a good thing - bringing humanity to technology is overdue (without regard to Steve Job's responsive rant). And students being forced to learn more than, "OMGWTF" and maybe even the self confidence to read an owners manual for something.
i am snow. fear me.
Tech literacy is by no means the whole problem.
This reminds of a news story I read recently about a library here in the country. The author had visited it, and discovered to his dismay that it was very difficult to find a book, because they were no longer in alphabetical order by name of author, as is traditional. He asked the librarians about it, and was told they didn't that any more; it did not help readers because they no longer knew the alphabet. The author concluded (somewhat unfairly, in my opinion) that he had found the ultimate contradiction in terms: A library for analphabetes.
Narrowing down a search in a browser has little to do with tech literacy. It is all about general knowledge, or more precisely, the ability to find landmarks in the landscape of general knowledge. There is an important difference between the internet and a traditional encyclopedia (or library). The latter ordered subjects in a one-dimensional series according to the completely arbitrary but universally agreed sequence of the alphabet. The former puts knowledge in a multi-dimensional space defined by more relevant but also much vaguer system of keys; i.e. search terms.
Of course works and encyclopedias that dealt with knowledge on a by-subject basis have always existed, but there is a basic reason why most use the alphabetical order: It is much easier. The 'new' way of ordering knowledge that is offered by the internet is much more complex and demands some knowledge of the landscape, an understanding of what links to what. It will demand a return to knowledge-based education; no longer the kind of knowledge that can enumerate the rivers of Spain or all US vice-presidents, but a diluted version of the kind of knowledge a Leonardo da Vinci had --- universal knowledge, brought down to its basics.
schools are treated as areas of knowledge. teachers are treated as source of knowledge.
i think that should be changed to schools are areas that facilitate the creation of knowledge. teachers are facilitators for students to discover and learn. in addition, the parents play a crucial role in the development of the students. it's not like dump your kids there and out goes an einstein.
let's take an example of the recent demotion of pluto from being a planet. a teacher who does not update with the latest scientific news will still teach pluto as being a planet. however, if students were to regularly look for current events in the scientific world, then healthy debates and new understanding will result, with the teacher learning along the way. the teachers should help student to critical thinking and research and engage students in healthy discussions in topic. the teacher should also help in emphasizing on team work and cooperation.
based on my experience, i get very bored when the teacher just flashes everything in a powerpoint presentation and just talks about what is on the screen. i could have gotten the file and studied it myself and used the wasted time doing other things. but when i'm faced with a problem, it gets me excited as i discover things and use your brain through critical thinking.
Live your life each day as if it was your last.
I teach at both a charter high school here in Central AZ, and at the local community college. I'm not a certified teacher, but, rather, worked as an engineer/astronomer for NASA for a lotta years. I'm astounded by the general lack of literacy (and numeracy) of students these days! An example: A student in my astronomy class at the college entered the following on his final exam: "The expansion of the Universe is opposed by the holdingness of space." Other examples: There are a quite a few teachers who know almost nothing about what they're teaching, especially in the sciences. A woman who had just won an award as "science teacher of the year" tried to correct me as I was explaining the phases of the moon to a kid at a local star party. She very enthusiastically gave me an explanation that was so wrong I can't even bring myself to repeat it! Another teacher interrupted me during a talk I was giving to her class on earth satellites. I had just explained why astronauts feel weightless in orbit. She tried to correct my explanation with this sentence: "But everyone knows there's no gravity in space."!!! Unitl teaching is both a well-paid and well-respected career, and until parents demand that their childred actually learn in school, and make sure their kids are in school regularly, we'll continue to see postings such as this one. And, of course, the "good jobs" will continue to immigrate to India.... (Sorry about this rant, but I DO feel SO much better, now!)
What I have found is we have students who can regurgitate facts, fill in "multiple guess" bubbles, and cut and paste beautifully. However, they cannot define a task, define keywords, ask pertinent questions about topics, narrow a topic, postulate a thesis, search using indices and tables of contents, skim and scan text for information, locate print and electronic sources, extract relevant information, paraphrase, organize information from various sources, properly attribute sources, and create a logical well-thought out project in their own words.
I've been working specifically with information literacy for the past four years and have discovered that even the most "tech" savvy students are the most deceived by their supposed fluency with the internet. They are information illiterate. In addition, they generally do not access print sources that, in some academic areas, still have better vetted, broader and deeper information than can be found on the net.
The American Association of School Librarians (1998), the Association for Educational Communications and Technology (1988), and the California Library Association (2004) have set 9 standards with ~160 specific skills for grades K-12.
That's insane, I'm a college student and I know how to use the Google just fine.
only 49 percent of the test-takers correctly evaluated a set of Web sites for objectivity, authority and timeliness. Only 35 percent could correctly narrow an overly broad Internet search
Only 1 percent of the people taking the survey said they read slashdot.
"To be is to do." --Socrates
"To do is to be." -- Aristotle
"Do-Be-Do-Be-Do..." --Sinatra
I think ridig requirements for teachers are going to produe rigid minds in kids. The classroom needs to be a place of flexibility if we want to produce flexible minds, and flexible people, capable of dealing with varying social and academic predicaments. See the post on teacher John Gatto above.
The problem you refer to about disruptive students -- and I substitute teach and totally agree with your observations -- started long before No Child Left Behind. Sometime in 1975 laws were passed to accommodate the handicapped, and these laws have been "improved" several times since then. The problem is that chronically disruptive students have also been sheltered under the term, handicap. These students enjoy protection under the law to continue their bad behavior that undermines the learning of the other children, including the real handicap children in wheelchairs and so forth.
NCLB is a bad idea, and schools are suffering under it; but the problems in public schools that you mention didn't begin there.
quiquid id est, timeo puellas et oscula dantes.
And why do we need to ensure (meaning spending taxpayers money) to make sure that everyone grows to their "full potential"? I personally don't care if someone their is so fucked up they cant teach themselves to read in their spare time. More cheap labour to serve me and less potential competition for me.
Ah, but you do care, because that's what has made Western nations rich, successful, and powerful, and what ensures your own standard of living.
The alternative, in which only a tiny elite is educated, still exists in many nations, and they are appropriately poor, and, more importantly, even the richest and most powerful individuals in those nations are weak compared to the power of Western democracies.
We didn't get to this point by accident, good will, or even struggle of the people; public education and Western democracies have dominated for the last century because they have worked well and are competitive. And whatever will replace them will likely involve universal literacy and public education as well because nations that don't have those are simply not competitive or efficient.
1- That it can be taught. (I have direct empirical evidence of this.)
2- It can't be mass-taught. (This is thoughtful speculation.)
Exam 4/C again. Maybe I'll do better this time.