Slashdot Mirror
Home Computers Equal Lower Test Scores
An anonymous reader writes "Politicians and education activists have long sought to eliminate the 'digital divide' by guaranteeing universal access to home computers, and in some cases to high-speed Internet service. But a Duke University study finds these efforts would actually widen the achievement gap in math and reading scores. Students in grades five through eight, particularly those from disadvantaged families, tend to post lower scores once these technologies arrive in their homes."
Without a computer you have to learn how to think.
Students in grades five through eight, particularly those from disadvantaged families, tend to post lower scores once these technologies arrive in their home.
Then test them on something meaningful, like how quickly they can get a Tactical Nuke in Modern Warfare 2 by camping with One Man Army and the Noob Tube!
That which does not kill me only postpones the inevitable.
I'm sure parenting has nothing to do with it, right? The mere presence of computers must be the only factor here.
Kids with access to internet waste time on internet! No way!
our obsession with school test scores is not such a hot idea.
There are two things that strikes me when looking at the graph. The increase in laptop sales (ignoring the smaller ones) is ingsignificant, the other thing is that it's in percentage, which clearly doesn't say anything about the change in PC sales, since netbooks and smaller laptops are newer technology and I have a feeling that people have more money to buy computers these days. I could be wrong, but it would be interesting to see the graph taking into account the actual sales in number of units, and the actual sales in terms of cost.
The Internet is for porn, not homework.
the tests are wrong and not the children?
Sig it.
I would have read the article, but between the title and the text was an advert for some new ADHD medicine. "Are your child's ADHD symptoms controlled . . . even after soccer practice?" I got distracted by the shiny Flash advert telling me to take more drugs.
So, they found a correlation between the two? Perhaps the decision to buy a computer was caused by poor academic performance, rather than vice-versa. Unless the decision to buy a computer was made without connection to a particular situation, they don't know which way causation ran.
I wish the luddities would stop trying to blame the technology. It's here to stay. Get over it. If you're seriously telling me a 16 year old without exposure to computers is better off in the modern world, I'll ask you to please dispose of the drugs.
If you have a 10-14 year old who suddenly gets access to a computer and all the distractions that come with it - games, (and shock horror porn if they can get to it0 etc. - you can expect a dip while the child adjusts. If the same kid had grown up with these things it'd be no big deal. I don't doubt that cable TV would have the same effect. All these things require some supervision in their use. But then so does a soccer or basket ball. Kids can find that distracting too.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Young children are thirsty for knnowledge. Anyone who has had any exposure to a 6-8 year old in the "why daddy" stage knows this. The problem is this is not fostered in many kids. If, at this stage, children are taught how to answer their own questions, using the tools available to them, then it will foster a lifetime of learning.
This is what my parents did with me, although in my day it was "why don't you go get the encyclopedia and we will look it up together?". Nowadays it should be "why don't we go look at the computer together". Guided by a parent, from a YOUNG AGE, this helps in several ways
- It teaches kids that, if they have questions, the materials are available to help them. They don't have to sit in ignorance just because they don't know the answer.
- It teaches kids how to find information when they need it
- It teaches kids how to think critically about that information, and discard the good from the bad.
World of Warcraft
Is it possible that kids using the computers isn't the problem? Perhaps it is that their parents monopolize the devices and spend all their time on the internet instead of interacting with their kids. It's a parent's involvement with their children that has the largest effect on their school work.
Do they test skills like being able to effectively research topics on the internet, write extended reports that make good use of various media, use spreadsheets or algorithms to model and investigate math problems?
...because if they don't, and instead focus on rote learning of little atoms of technical information (like being able to solve a quadratic equation that just happens to factor nicely) then what possible combination of misconceptions could lead to the idea that using a computer would improve performance on these tests?
That's not to say that handing out computers will automatically help kids with the first set of skills, either: it just means that if schools changed their curriculum to reflect the late 20th century, teachers could hand out computer-based assignments without agonizing about equity issues (unless Mum's new boyfriend is hogging the computer 24/7 to look at pr0n - but then you can't fix everything).
In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
It's not the computer that's at fault but the people who are responsible for the idea.
The "activists" contribute their moral outrage but don't much care if the kids actually get an education. It's the opportunity to display moral outrage that's the pay off for the activists. If the kids don't learn anything that's another opportunity to display moral outrage.
The politicians want to look like they're doing something and preferably with other people's money - getting something for nothing, even something useless, is politically worthwhile. Does it matter if the kids learn? Obviously not.
There's really only one group that has an unquestionable claim to be concerned primarily with education and that's the parents. They're not consulted because they might ask uncomfortable questions like "Will the computer do anything worthwhile?" Neither the activists nor the politicians are interested in having to answer questions like that.
Minutus cantorum, minutus balorum, minutus carborata descendum pantorum.
First!
btw, I'm not an anonymous coward. I have a name you insensative claud!
You may have a name but you obviously don't have a spellchecker ;-)
We somehow take technology, and expect miracles from it, far beyond what the users are capable of doing. Computers are tools, and they are only going to produce what the users are willing to invest in them of their time and effort. Disadvantaged kids need to learn how to study and investigate, before they will be able to use a computer to its potential as a learning aid. If they don't read or investigate now, computers aren't going to produce some sort of overnight change.
Here is the problem.
A child, that is not supervised to do anything that even closely resembles some sort of work on a computer will spend it on whatever this child finds to be the most interesting thing.
There will be many slashdotters here, who will say: "but I grew up with a computer in the house, maybe with more than one computer, and I learned on it."
These people are correct. It is possible to learn with a computer. However their circumstances, like my own, were limited to a small number of things that we could do. I didn't have access to a real computer until about 12, but I was interested in them by reading about them and learning how to do things with them on paper. I made programs and my first programs were some games, I made them on paper and later was able to transfer those into a real machine.
The kids who grew up into /. readers are in their very late twenties to their very late thirties, these had computers in the house in eighties - nineties, we had computers that ran much simpler operating systems and there was not such a clear abundance of actually very user friendly and easy stuff to do, except for pretty good 2D games actually. These kids were obviously from a bit more affluent backgrounds, many saw their parents use computers for work, but this is not necessary.
So these kids, who became interested in the machines, found the most interesting thing to do with their computers was to try and create stuff, to produce things with computer. Sure they plaid games with them, but they also tried writing their own games. They wrote tools, text editors, calculators, drawing programs, they built stuff with computers, added their own extension boards, it was interesting, it was something that could be shown off to the peers, at least to those who cared, so this was also a way to achieve some status among peers.
If at the time the computers were what they are today: very powerful tools with very advanced user interfaces that provided tens of thousands if not millions of different ways to work with the machines plus the ability to socialize in hundreds of ways on line, ability to download music/movies/games within minutes or hours of appearance of new titles, ability to interface with computers through phones and have it all synchronize, if at that time the games looked like they were built by multi-million dollar Hollywood studios, it would have created the perception (maybe partially correct perception) that one person's ability to try and manipulate these complex networked nodes with 3D graphics engines was no longer accessible to a kid.
The operating systems of today go beyond simple DOS so much, that a kid could not do much with those directly because it takes a million of human lives to learn them.
Beside that, there are calculators, wikipedia, sites that offer to do your homework, p2p, where answers can be probably found and downloaded and shared further, there is facebook/myspace/whatever, there are all these tools that can do work for you and there is no TIME for anything between all of the tweets and twats on line. Though we did have chatrooms, BBSs and IRCs.
I think the Ender's game had an idea that made sense, I am sure it's not the only book that had that idea of a network that is created on purpose for education only.
The kids, who have nobody to guide them about how to use the machines they are given for learning at least should be put into position where learning is what they are pushed to through the kind of a computer/network system that they would be allowed to use.
The computers for kids that are expected to learn something, should be different from the 'normal' today's machines, they should be simpler in terms of software/hardware interaction, at least there should be a way to switch between a full crazy modern OS and a simple OS for learning about how the computers work. The network should be designed for learning. There should be things to do in it that would not give out answers but that would pro
You can't handle the truth.
What's more important in life? Computer skills or getting high test scores?
There are several problems with this:
1 - The group being tested is predisposed to lower grades.
2 - The actual use of the home computer ( games, etc instead of work )
Guess it still holds true you can make any study say what you want, they are all lies.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Who'd have thought?
Computers and technology in gerneral is not a replacement for quality instruction. Unfortunately, this emphasis on technology as a way to overcome poor instruction is failing miserably. In schools in neighborhoods with more money, I see these fancy electronic Blackboards, whiteboards, and course management software which all amount to precisely nothing if the teacher is unable to present the material logically, cohesively, and in a manner which can be understood. This is not to stay that technology lacks any importance whatsoever, quite the contrary. A lack of computer know-how or knowledge can be an automatic disqualifier in even some of the lower jobs in today's job market so technology (or a reasonable amount, thereof) in the classroom is important. Instead of spending lots of money on Blackboard/WebCT and similar, lets look at open source to replace these and use the money saved towards teacher education. Both DimDim and dotLrn make excellent replacements on that front. Finally, let's look at teacher education in college - it generally disturbs me that the Education major is a default major. I heard two sophmores shrug their shoulders and say, "I'll go into education." A good teacher inspires, motivates, and is able to teach material to students: tactily, auditorily, and visually. At my alma matter, I could not help but shake my head at the types of people going into education as I wouldn't want them teaching my son or daughter. There needs to be tougher academic standards and stricter entry requirements into these programs. Good teachers will only be augmented by technology, poor teachers will be "crutched" by technology.
The reason that 'the best' are not going into teaching is because it rewards poorly as a career.
The money sucks, you have to deal with people's undisciplined brats, you get blamed for kids' failures (instead of the kids and parents getting their fair share of the blame)....
About the only benefits are job security (which is evaporating slowly) and 3 months off during summer--(which is also evaporating as schools go 'year round').
Not only that, as a teacher you have to endure the meddling and mandates of everyone who wants to 'fix' the educational system, until you are a powerless mouthpiece for the official doctrine, and must also deliver the dogma-of-the-week in a specified manner.
We get bad teachers in this country (USA) because we have made it a TERRIBLE job.
If you make it HARDER for people to enter the career, as you are proposing (without offering ANY incentive), you won't have ANY TEACHERS AT ALL, NOT EVEN BAD ONES.
--PM
I be leave the test score depends on the person themselves I have seen some of the smartest people fail at standardized testing it really depends on the person that is my feelings anyway.
http://www.thetechnologygeek.org
Educators need to stop thinking that some how another computer or faster connection is going to some how be a panacea for their problems teaching. The computer is just a tool and nothing more, it might help when properly employed but its not going to do anything but harm in the hands of someone who does not know how to use it. Primary school is a case where the computer and Internet are simply not needed, possibly useful but NOT needed.
The basics of mathematics, English, physical science, and history are all easily contained and since they don't often change maintained in books. Over the course of the better part of two centuries many in this country have successfully gained a good liberal studies background using only books, face time with instructors, and where appropriate hands on experience. The reasons for the achievement gap, at least at the primary school level, don't have much to do with access to technology. Learning is a discipline. It takes work to learn, even for those who don't need as much drill an practice they still have to be willing to invest the mental energy in thinking about the subject they are studying in a critical way and attempting to relate that information to what they are learning in other subjects.
The problem is the underprivileged class in our society is largely surrounded by a culture which does not value discipline, work, or even simply curiosity. In many cases it glorifies failure and dependence. Its no surprise to me that technology makes scores worse in such an environment. There is little you can wrong with a book on mathematics except fail to read it, and maybe if these kids get bored enough they give a problem or two a try, get a sense of some achievement if they have any success. The computer on the other had provides an infinite amount of distraction and virtual assures they never give algebra a second look.
If we want to plow tax dollars into education than we should focus properly. We should get these kids some good text books. We should attack the culture of failure and dependence. We need to be politically incorrect enough to tell these kids its bad to be on the dole because you are not in control of your life someone else is and if you have any dreams at all you need to be self reliant. Lets read Ralph Waldo Emerson in the second grade rather than high school even if we have to read it to them. Lets get some teachers hired who are paid well enough to spend some serious time with a small enough number of kids that they can use the Socratic method and are proficient in the subjects they teach. Lets stop advancing kids to the next grade when they have not mastered the material. That is how you fix primary education, high school yes kids need to learn to use tools at that point but they first have to understand what the tools are for and that is where we have been failing.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Did they test those same kids for computer literacy before and after they got computers in their homes?
Computer literacy is an important skill. In today's world it is possibly more important than elementary math or spelling, as it to a large extent can substitute for either skill.
Trying to get entry level pseudo professional jobs, computer literacy is more important than the difference between a diploma and a GED. It is more important than how quickly you can add, subtract, multiply or divide. It is more important than your ability to analyze literature.
So my question is, on these important tests that the student did poorly in, did they test computer literacy? If their literacy went up 300% and they had a fairly minor drop in other scores, having the computer are getting them much more prepared for their futures than not having them would have.
Little Brother, watching the watchers
It's up to the children to use the computer to educate themselves. Parents cannot teach kids to do this. It should be schools that teach children how to browse Wikipedia and what to search for on Google.I was a "disadvantaged" youth who used the computer and the library to make it through the school system and graduate college. It can be done.
>>In disadvantaged households, parents are less likely to monitor children's computer use and guide children in using computers for educational purposes.
Which is why the entire digital divide issue is stupid, in my opinion.
Unless a kid is growing up without any exposure to computers at all, he'll be technologically proficient by the time he graduates. Study after study show that using technology often hurts, instead of helps, student performance.
I say this as someone who teaches teachers how to use technology in the classroom, and I start every lecture by saying, "Only use it when there's a damn good reason to do so."
And there *are* good reasons to do so. Sometimes. But the way that most schools use computers is nothing short of neglect.
Because performance at the college level requires a computer. You aren't going to be able to get anything done if you don't use a word processor, Google, Wikipedia, along with using the library. The simple fact is most kids don't know how to properly use a computer to study, or how to properly use a word processor, or how to properly find books in a library, or how to properly cite sources in MLA format, or how to properly educate themselves.
It's not the technology, it's the children not knowing how to use the resources they have. I had less resources than most of these kids and I made it through school, the fact that current generations have more resources does not mean current generation have mentors or adults to train them on how to use the internet. Most of the teachers and adults in these neighborhoods know less about the internet than their children and this is the source of the problem.
A nation of engineers who can't invent anything but who can build everything.
Thats not to say China hasn't invented anything in the past, but the proof is in the pudding. If test scores mattered then the Chinese would be inventing everything.
Test scores do not matter. Test scores wont make you a better computer programmer, or a better creative writer, or a better athlete, or a better artist, or a better psychologist, or a better doctor.
I wish the luddities would stop trying to blame the technology. It's here to stay. Get over it. If you're seriously telling me a 16 year old without exposure to computers is better off in the modern world, I'll ask you to please dispose of the drugs.
If you have a 10-14 year old who suddenly gets access to a computer and all the distractions that come with it - games, (and shock horror porn if they can get to it0 etc. - you can expect a dip while the child adjusts. If the same kid had grown up with these things it'd be no big deal. I don't doubt that cable TV would have the same effect. All these things require some supervision in their use. But then so does a soccer or basket ball. Kids can find that distracting too.
I learned about computers BEFORE I had my first computer. My exposure to computers was at the library, then it was at the computer clubhouse. I did get my own computer until I turned 17. By the time I got my computer I knew the internet would replace the library and that by having a computer I would have everything I would ever need to educate myself.
I took advantage of the computer to educate myself BEYOND what I was being taught at school. I would go to school all day and be on the internet all night and I wouldn't just play games, I would learn programming languages, learn how computers work, learn how to properly write via the word processor, learn everything from history to psychology, to sociology to physics. This was before there was a wikipedia, back before Google was popular.
The internet and computers ARE the new libraries. They are a learning device and it's up to parents and adults to introduce computers as a device to use for self education. The problem is most parents dont know how to use the computer themselves so their kids don't know. Most kids just aren't that smart to begin with and aren't self motivated, and their parents tend to know less about the technology than their kids and teachers know less than their parents.
What do you expect? If a teacher cannot tell their students about good websites to self educate, how do they expect the children to improve their test scores? If the teacher cannot tell the children how to use a word processor or to go to math.com thats the fault of the teacher. If the teacher cannot post videos up on Youtube thats the teachers fault if students cannot review the teachings after class. Maybe if teachers made Youtube videos instead of giving homework the test scores would improve. USE THE TECHNOLOGY AND STOP BLAMING IT!
Your post nails it. This is what makes the difference between kids who learn to self educate and kids who don't. I learned the hard way that teachers didn't like answering "why" questions when I got kicked out of class for asking too many questions.
The internet never complained that I was asking too many questions and I took complete advantage of that.
You've only named the tangible benefits. I stay in teaching because it's a lot of fun and personally very rewarding. Being present when a child goes from not understanding to understanding is a great experience. It's like watching babies take their first steps, but all day every day, and with more interesting learnings.
I think you've touched on something else, which is the existence of bad students. At some point (in the 80's?), it became taboo to say that students could be bad. I'm aware there's an ancient saying about this. If anything is wrong in a given classroom, the blame belongs solely on the teacher. You seem to suggest that there's always blame to go around. That's not true. Sometimes it can be purely ascribed to the teacher (I've met them) and other times it is purely the student who is at fault. I haven't seen many situations where I could say it's purely a parent's fault since they're not in the classroom.
Maybe this averages out to a notion of "fair share of blame" but if you look at every particular case and always try to divide it up among the three constituencies, I think that's incorrect.
My point here is that it's impossible, in a class full of bad students (I've met them) to say whether the teacher is any good at all. They could be good teachers (as opposed to the mythical and once-in-a-lifetime superteachers) and not get tangible results.
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
TV's Rot You Children's Brains!!
er... I mean computers
when I was 15 and I had my first PC, I did nothing with it except playing games and my grades nosedived... But gaming brought me together with people who did creative stuff with their PCs (on LANs) - Level-editing, programming, webdesigning,... they inspired me, I started programming myself and today I am a graduate computer scientist who used and still uses the internet heavily for learning.
So yeah, Computers can be bad for your grades, if you don't do anything than playing games anymore, but they can have the exact opposite effect - it depends on how you use them... maybe, JUST MAYBE there is a reason why 15 is not a legal age and you have legal guardians.
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
disadvantaged households == dipshit parent(s)
If I came home with poor scores, my parents were my biggest worry. I don't care if you gave kids of "disadvantaged households" a full library in their living room, they won't learn jack unless their parent(s) are forcing them. Hell, they've already got access to a full free library within their town! But instead that building's becoming a Chuck E. Cheese.
I figured it would be all the time they spent on Facebook, instead of studying, learning, being kids, and whatever we used to do when a computer cost six grand.
PS. Get off my lawn.
(Yeah, yeah...I was lucky to have a computer at any price. You had to build your own abacus from a kit that cost ten grand.....no..wait...you had to carve your own abacus kit bits with stone tools.....no...wait.....you had to wait for the primordial soup to simmer before trees even existed...)
"City hall" in German is "Rathaus" Kinda explains a few things......
That is a misleading title, subject-line. TFA says that it's particularly true for disadvantaged families. Further the researchers "concluded that home computers are put to more productive use in households where parental monitoring is more effective. In disadvantaged households, parents are less likely to monitor children's computer use and guide children in using computers for educational purposes."
Now what are the results for children of more affluent parents or parents who spend more tyme with their children? If and when the answer for these show the same results then it might be true.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
I told them that correlation is not causation, but they didn't listen.
The Internet has given stupid people the resources of intelligent people.
No wonder my test scores suck. :P Let's go back to pencils, writings, fingers, toes, etc.
Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
Dunno about you, but that Primordial Soup is pretty tasty.
Do they, and technology in general, make us lazy or stupid? Or do they help us?
I think they can and do both. Being a TBI or Traumatic Brain Injury survivor I have spent years learning how to use compensatory strategies for my weaknesses. One of them is my memory so for instance when I cook, even if I only spend a few minutes to boil water for tea, I use a windup timer. When the alarm goes off I know to check the water or food. I do the same for my laundry. Or planning, I use a notebook planner to write appointments and to-do lists. However I sometimes fail to check the planner so when I can I use the built-in calendar/planner on my cellphone. When I make an appointment with my doc I'll write it in my planner and program my cellphone at the same tyme. The personal care coordinator I see at my doc's office tried to get me to use the calendar/planner software my Mac came with, iCal, but I find the cellphone better.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
This was one thing I had a problem with. I know what 12 x 12 is, we had to memorize it, so I don't need to write it out long-hand. I can solve 3x + 4x = 14 in my head, requiring me to write it out long-hand is a waste. On the other hand I may want to write out in long-hand f'(x) or f(x), damn the integral symbol isn't showing, so the integral of f(x).
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Looks like another case of edu-vaporware. Now it's eDukeNukem time!
Can you find 10^100 anywhere? Can you hold it in your hands?
But 10^100 doesn't stop existing, to the extent that it does exist, simply because you stopped thinking about it.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I'm guessing it's less that the computer itself is dumbing anyone down, and more that they're doing it instead of other things. 8+ hours a day doesn't leave a lot of time to study.
It could be that using the computer can replace some studying. Games can help improve thinking skills as well as prepare people for careers. People can learn about running a business, or other things such as critical thinking skills, by playing the Hotdog Stand game. Amazon's description says "Students improve math, problem-solving, and communication skills in this real-life business simulation where they manage a busy concession stand in a big-city stadium. Students interpret information, keep records, determine prices, and plat (my comment - plot?) marketing strategies." Super Smart Games lists more games for learning.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Instead of doing my homework I would go home and program on my computer all night. Eventually I would bring a notebook to class and write up programs during class instead of paying attention. This went on for about 10 years, I barely passed junior high and high school. Should I blame computers for the distraction, my parents for not regulating my interests, or myself for not putting in the effort towards academics?
I will admit that the way kids use computers in the 80s and 90s is quite a bit different than the way they use them today. So perhaps my own experiences don't apply. Instead of programming all day I suspect most people just chat all day. We had computer games back then, it was pretty easy to play them all day. given that old games were sometimes very very long.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
And his name is Claude.
"I used to study all the time, then I got this infinite porn machine...."
I've just finished writing a dissertation for which I had several hundred pages of research and by the end I was wishing I had OCRed everything. Trying to find one specific quotation from somewhere in three ringbinders of notes and photocopies is exactly the sort of thing that's hard - and boring - for a human, but easy for a computer.
Maybe but there's a difference between note taking and writing a dissertation. Using a computer/word processor to write a paper is much faster than using pen and paper. Once written, editing a digital file is simple whereas editing pen and paper requires the paper to be compleatly rewritten.
In a way I'm in a similar situation. I've got hundreds if not thousands of photos on film, going back more than 10 years, and am in the process of scanning them. Would I give up the enjoyment of working in a darkroom by shooting digitally in order to avoid scanning? Not at all. I however would like to shoot digitally and on film, take a photo and have it on film as well as in a digital file.
I, and you, could make it easier too. As I shoot and develop a roll of film I could scan them. And after you've written notes, you can scan or type them in a new doc. I, and you, will have both then. Of course you may not want the hand written notes, then you can toss it. Me, I love gardening and making my own compost, so I compost some paper while recycling the rest.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
http://www.fas.org/immuneattack/
Thanks for that, it looks great. Unfortunately it's Windows only for now and it'll take more than that for me to install Windows on my computer. Maybe it can run in Crossover or WINE.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
It's not the technology, it's the children not knowing how to use the resources they have. I had less resources than most of these kids and I made it through school,
You got by without the technology but today's students can't? What makes them less capable? Stupidity?
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
So was mine. But that was years ago. Now I had a niece, she just graduated, in kindergarten attending a Chinese Immersion School, and my sister wants me to help her daughter with Chinese. I told her she, my niece, would blow me away. I hardly recall any Chinese. Maybe by working with her I can improve my own Chinese???
What really gets me is that to meet my college general education requirements I took French and my niece trounces me in French too. So far beside her native tongue of English, my niece has learned Chinese, French, and American Sign Language, ASL.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
what i do think can then do far more and allow me to learn more of what i want.
THIS article must be of the same genre as hollywood stats
a smarter approach is to spend some of the education budget in guiding kids to self-educate.
I compleatly agree. And it doesn't have to cost more. In elementary school for 2nd grade I had a brand new teacher and in class for some subjects such as math, reading, and vocabulary, she had teaching aids like flash cards. In those subjects she had us go at our own speed, self-paced. Then students who got ahead helped slower students.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
This is why I'm an instructional designer in the corporate world. I make twice as much as a public school teacher and don't have to deal with bratty kids.
It's not the technology, it's the children not knowing how to use the resources they have. I had less resources than most of these kids and I made it through school,
You got by without the technology but today's students can't? What makes them less capable? Stupidity?
Falcon
I didn't get by without the technology. The only reason I went to college at all is because I had a computer. I'm self educated in a lot of ways that I wouldn't have been if not for the computer.
I was way ahead in math starting school(and because of that ever onwards right through university) because of a simple little math game
Why dig up that math game? Check out Hot Dog Stand. In it the player runs a stadium concessionary stand, the goal being to make money. Given a beginning amount of money you, the player, go through a to-do checklist. Checking the calendar schedule you see what activity is planned, a baseball, football, or soccer game for instance. Then going by previous such events you see what sells and what doesn't. For instance at football games hot dogs sell a lot but at soccer games turkey dogs sell more. Also checking history you set prices for each item, is more money made setting hot dogs prices at $2 or at $2.50 for instance. Or how many sodas are sold at what price?
Not only does the game help learning math, but it also helps with decision making and other executive thinking skills. Amazon's product description says:
"Students improve math, problem-solving, and communication skills in this real-life business simulation where they manage a busy concession stand in a big-city stadium. Students interpret information, keep records, determine prices, and plat marketing strategies."
"By gathering information from a variety of sources in the Office, students can make purchasing and pricing decisions. Students see if their plans yield profitable results when they open the Stand for business! Will they be able to reach their goals? With access to an assortment of tools students can accomplish their goals. An electronic checkbook, a calculator, a franchise report, a bulletin board of stadium events, and a daily weather report are among the resources available. To add to the realism of the simulation, students encounter unexpected events-both opportunities and potential pitfalls-that they handle while working in the Office and running the Stand."
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Computers and the internet can help people learn a lot. Just because you don't see it, or won't acknowledge it, does not mean it's not true.
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
Okay, you got by with less resources, why do you think today's students can't do the same?
Falcon
Should there be a Law?
they can do all the gotcha studies that they want, but it is never going to change what the real problem is. Programs to help and promote good parenting should be the focus if you want these metrics to improve.
It's all lovely sounding to toss out some BS objection to standardized testing, especially given that tests are flawed and TEACHERS cheat for their students, but you haven't proposed a workable alternative.
We need a way to rank students, and we need a way to see if students are learning. We need this to cover the largest population possible, ideally the whole world but we'd settle for "English speaking students in Texas" or "French speaking students in Quebec".
Grades are out. Grades assigned by one teacher bear no relation to grades assigned by a different teacher.
Pretending for a moment that it is possible to fire a non-molesting teacher, we also need a way to identify teachers that don't cause students to improve.
It's really quite impossible to get any improvement in education if you refuse all attempts to measure it. You can shout "we're doing GREAT" all you want, and I can shout back "the students haven't learned shit". It's an argument without numbers, and nothing is accomplished.
Schools, and especially teacher unions, hate being held accountable. They hate numbers, because numbers cut through the bullshit excuses and handwaving. This is why teachers attack testing.
It wasn't computer skills that got me into a university.
That degree is mighty important for even getting a job interview.
Most people get by with awful computer skills. Arguably, this includes the IT guys and far too many programmers!
Give a kid paper and pencil homework and paper and pencil tests, and then give them a paper and pencil summary test. The last will give a decent approximation of ability as compared to scores from the first two.
Give a kid a computer to use to do homework and take tests, then give them a paper and pencil summary test. The last will show a drop in scores, not because it's a different medium, but because they're dragging their feet, being passive-aggressive, just plain outright resenting having to go back to the stone age for this boring test when they could be piloting a PC.
And among which kids will you see this effect most? The less privileged. Because the computer was a greater step forward to them as compared to their more privileged pals and so taking it away or denying its use is a greater loss.
Computerize the end-of-grade tests and watch the scores bounce back up. Of courts that means standardizing them in that form, which means everyone has to use a computer, which means everyone gets access to a computer, and that'd be one giant leap for North Carolina-kind. No, it's far more economical and find faults so you can ask for more money for improvements than it is to spend money on things to make improvements so there's no problem any more. If they bought computers there wouldn't be money for raises for the teachers of the kids who do poorly because they have computers, when what they really need in order to improve is better paid teachers.
And save the Teachers Deserve More rants. I'm a teacher. Fuck us. The kids deserve more but aren't getting it. Hell, they're not getting enough. And 5 to 1 what they'll get out of this Duke study when the NC legislature uses it to plus the hole in their purse is blamed.
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
Thank you for teaching. I'm glad you personally find it a rewarding job and that you apparently can make ends meet.
However, I claim that society misses out on a lot of gifted teachers because they are unwilling or unable to trade off so much money for the sake of personal rewards, and that we are better served by incentivizing good teachers rather than heaping more requirements on them in order to enter the profession.
As to responsibility for failure, yes, by all means assign the blame where it justly belongs. I argue that we, as a society, scapegoat teachers routinely when the blame properly belongs on either student or parent.
Best,
--PM
Next feat of amazingness, - transform between dimensions and time.
.
Voting up, Voting down - If I really gave a fuck about your approval or not, I'd come and ask you.
Here is the take from someone familiar with the paper. Quoted without permission, and passed along from hand to hand, so not able to attribute.
The usual sort of mainstream media shock-value headline. Unfortunate since it was quoted directly from Eureka Alerts. Sad.
So if you want to claim it applies to your life, go ahead. But don't make claims about general application and for goodness sake, don't use it to justify messing with your own kids lives.
Any preoccupation with ideas of what is right or wrong in conduct shows an arrested intellectual development. (Wilde)
I'd like to see how opposite the results are in a country that isn't filled with a bunch of, well... Americans.
Nowhere have I encountered more resistence to computers in education than from educators. Treat this study as you would a report that proves that the TCO for Windows is lower than Linux.I wonder how the folks at Open Cobalt (Duke, same as study) feel about it. I see Cobalt as the foundation for future educational software.
It seems to me that in this case the "problem" with the home computer was that is was a distraction. That is exactly the point. We need to change how we teach, to use the allure of the computer to hold the student's attention. Was chat software to blame? Interesting. Ten years ago I made the point that what students crave is social interaction, so the educator's challenge is to make use of that. Even us nerds like to have an IRC channel or two open while we work.
We do not teach our kids type setting and book binding. What we need is better educational software, and teaching methods that build upon that software foundation.
Gary Dunn
Open Slate Project