Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

A Silicon Valley School That Doesn't Use Computers

Posted by timothy on from the back-to-nature dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Matt Richtel writes that many employees of Silicon Valley giants like Google, Apple, Yahoo and Hewlett-Packard send their children to the Waldorf School in Los Altos where the school's chief teaching tools are anything but high-tech: pens and paper, knitting needles and, occasionally, mud. Not a computer to be found. No screens at all. Computers are not allowed in the classroom, and the school even frowns on their use at home. 'I fundamentally reject the notion you need technology aids in grammar school,' says Alan Eagle whose daughter, Andie, attends a Waldorf school, an independent school movement that boasts an 86 year history in North America. 'The idea that an app on an iPad can better teach my kids to read or do arithmetic, that's ridiculous.' Advocates for equipping schools with technology say computers can hold students' attention and, in fact, that young people who have been weaned on electronic devices will not tune in without them."

66 of 333 comments (clear)

  1. Not all schools are equal by penguinbroker · · Score: 4, Interesting

    A computer/tablet can't teach as well as a good or great teacher (as the students at Waldorf likely have access to), but in a large percentage of cases around the country, where the teachers are in fact poor, computers and tablets can make a tremendous difference.

    1. Re:Not all schools are equal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A computer/tablet can't teach as well as a good or great teacher (as the students at Waldorf likely have access to), but in a large percentage of cases around the country, where the teachers are in fact poor, computers and tablets can make a tremendous difference.

      [citation needed]

    2. Re:Not all schools are equal by kervin · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I was just about to make this exact point.

      Access to money or resources in general changes the problem. Poorer schools often have terrible teacher to student ratios, constant budget cuts ( everyone hates taxes right? ), and lots of social and environmental ( not talking about the weather here ) problems to deal with. Teachers become a lot more things than just 'educators'. In fact, having a computer assist in the education while the teacher plays counselor/discipline enforcer/confidant/role mole/etc, etc. is a lucky break for these poor overworked saps.

      What we need is smarter Education software. Software that knows the material needed for ever level. Software that adapts to the students special needs. Software that alerts the teacher when the student seems to have a problem ( eg. dyslexia, attention span issues ). Software that may help keep inexperienced Educators themselves at a particular teaching pace or to a particular teaching standard.

    3. Re:Not all schools are equal by JoeRandomHacker · · Score: 3, Insightful

      [...], but in a large percentage of cases around the country, where the teachers are in fact poor, [...]

      [citation needed]

      Citing personal experience, perhaps.

      Few people have personal experience with "a large percentage of cases around the country", and those who do should generally have something they can cite to back up their claims.

    4. Re:Not all schools are equal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      "...in a large percentage of cases around the country, where the teachers are in fact poor.." - *citation needed*

      Certainly there exist poor teachers, but a "large percentage?" I doubt it. I have had one or two teachers in my day that I didn't care for, but I wouldn't rate even them as "poor." I have used computer tutorials also, in have more often than not found them bad to awful in quality.

      Assuming for the sake of argument that there are a large number of poor teachers in "poor schools," these are also the schools least likely to be able to afford computers, or to afford to keep them running.

      What we really need to do is follow the example of countries where schools and teaching are much better: Pay the teachers more, and require better trained teachers. Most especially, we need to counter the right-wing canard that teachers are "overpaid" when in fact they are more typically overworked and underpaid.

      Fair disclosure: I was married to a teacher, and she was one of the hardest working, most dedicated people I know. The same was true of most of the other teachers she worked with.

    5. Re:Not all schools are equal by tomhudson · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We don't need "smarter education software." We need to remove computers from the classrooms. It's been going onto 30 years now and there hasn't been a SINGLE study showing computers help, and plenty showing they don't.

      And to fire teachers who cannot teach.

    6. Re:Not all schools are equal by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And to fire teachers who cannot teach.

      As a gifted troublemaker born into a family of educators, I find that the problem is not bad teachers. The problem is parents who never said no to their little Johnny when he screamed and cried for his fifth Twinkie of the day. The problem is parents too caught up in their own careers or reliving their youth to actually do any damn parenting. You parents insist that your rotten spawn be allowed to use cell phones in class for "safety" reasons, you insist on suing the schools whenever a teacher tries to discipline your shithead kid and then bitch and moan all day that teachers aren't doing their jobs ( "my little Johnny is an angel, he would never do a thing like that!"). Of course the rich Right is all over it, saying that the teachers are bad and that the only solution is more budget cuts for public schools. What?!

      Hey, bub, news flash - Teachers can't do their jobs because of assholes like you!

      Your shithead kids are unmotivated and undisciplined because you have failed in your responsibility as parents, spoiling rotten your fat little narcissistic shitheads who grow up with gadgetry and unrealistic expectations and ADD medication as their only parents. You, are out at the bar looking for a new wife, or out driving your ridiculously expensive sports car, or working unnecessary 16-hour days collecting pig disgusting amounts of money and power to stroke your own ego.

      It is you, the parents, who have failed in your responsibility, not the teachers. Back the fuck off. Goddamn yuppies.

    7. Re:Not all schools are equal by jc42 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Few people have personal experience with "a large percentage of cases around the country", and those who do should generally have something they can cite to back up their claims.

      Yeah, and it doesn't require large numbers to show that some teachers are competent and others are incompetent. Two example will suffice for an "existence proof".

      A personal example: Back in grade school, I remember when "long division" was introduced. Note that I didn't say "taught", because by the end of the Spring term, none of the students in my (5th-grade?) class got it at all. I'd been fairly good at math before that, but this was taught as a pure rote memorization exercise, with no clues as to how it worked or why anyone would ever want to do something so bizarre and incomprehensible and (apparently) useless.

      But next Fall, the teacher I had quickly made a comment that went over the heads of most of the kids, but I and several others instantly picked up on it. She said that to really do it right, you should write in all the zeroes at the ends of the column of numbers, since what you were really doing was multiplying the "tens" digits at the top by the remainder of subtraction at the bottom, and all those numbers really do have zeroes to the right. But people usually leave out the zeroes, because you know they're there, and it saves a bit of time. When she explained this, what was going on instantly made sense to me (and to a few others), and I was able to do it correctly from then on. In particular, I understood why you need to be careful to keep things aligned vertically, which was the main thing that tripped up most of the kids (and is also a problem with software whose results are displayed in the variable-width fonts that the artsy "designer" crowd prefer. ;-)

      So right there, we have an example each of an incompetent teacher and a competent teacher for the same subject matter. A computerized lesson would (presumably) be done in the competent manner, and would make the explanation available to students who bother to read it, and would thus be better than the incompetent teacher.

      In my (admittedly limited) experience, the teachers of technical subject in the lower schools are almost always incompetent. The explanation is well-known: If you're competent in math, why would you voluntarily spend your time in a low-paid job like grade-school teacher, when you could be making much better money elsewhere?

      I'd suggest that computerized education might not be as good as good teachers. But until we're willing to pay what it takes to find those good teachers and attract them to teaching, we're probably stuck with the computerized stuff. And it does have the advantage that it sits there patiently waiting for the students to come along, while living teachers have lives and can't be put to sleep until a student needs them.

      --
      Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    8. Re:Not all schools are equal by bunratty · · Score: 2

      Yes, a teacher is best. There are ways computer can help, by giving individualized instruction that a teacher may not have time to give, or may not have the training to give. I once worked for a literacy company that sold software that gave students personalized help to assist them in learning to read and write. From the results I saw, using the computer program for fifteen minutes a day really helped. In the writing samples I saw, the students often went from making unintelligible scribbles to writing coherent paragraphs within a year. Of course, the teachers still had to have some training, and the work at the computer was reinforced by giving the children cheap "books" printed on thin paper to take home, but using the program was an essential part of the instruction.

      I've heard that JUMP Math may be a similar system for teaching math.

      You can't just plop a student in front of a computer and expect that the student will learn better, or even learn anything at all. The curriculum needs to be in place, and the computer needs to do what a computer is best at -- interacting with a student repetitively without making a mistake or judging the student. And computers can even help in the U.S., especially in classrooms crowded with poor children who need far more attention that one teacher can give.

      --
      What a fool believes, he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.
    9. Re:Not all schools are equal by jaweekes · · Score: 4, Insightful

      My wife is an English teacher for High School, and I'm an IT Manager, so we have debated this a lot.

      I think you are almost right. My wife and I do not see where computers would help in, say, an English Lit classroom. This might be different with Math and Sciences but we can't speak for that. We both think that it removes hands-on learning and frees the teacher from actually teaching anything (not a good thing). If this improves teaching, then yes, just as in business these teachers should be replaced by robots.

      But I think that all the money that is being spent on computers and tests would be better spent on helping teachers to improve. A group of experienced teachers going around and sitting in on classes for a week or so and providing positive feedback would work wonders on some of the "bad" teachers, who might just be new and overwhelmed, or lacking in support or something else.

      I've also noticed that computers in classrooms are implemented in a crap way. My wife's last school just gave every single teacher and student IPad's without increasing the amount of IT support in the school, or even increasing the amount of power outlets in the classroom. I think this set up will cause more problems, more wasted time in classes, and a downturn in education. There is also a severe lack of training and a lack of time to create lessons that will use the technology well, so it really makes it useless to give them these tools.

    10. Re:Not all schools are equal by bcrowell · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Poorer schools often have terrible teacher to student ratios[...]

      The school they're describing is in California. My kids go to public schools in California, and I don't think what you're saying is accurate. In the late 90's/early 2000's, California went through a period where the economy was good, and we got class size reduction. It was state-mandated, e.g., they decided that in K-2 or whatever they would have a maximum student-to-teacher ratio of x. Then the economy turned sour, and they started laying off teachers and increasing class sizes again. Our school district is affluent, and it has some very highly ranked schools. However, my kids are experiencing the same extremely large class sizes as everyone else in California.

      IIRC, research also shows that class size does not have any empirically measurable effect on learning until you get it down to about 10 -- which isn't going to happen in any public school.

      It's true that in the US, when schools draw from a population with low socioeconomic status, those schools are almost always horrible by all the available objective measures. However, I'm really not convinced that that has all that much to do with funding and class size. I think it's overwhelmingly a "network effect," similar to the network effect that makes Windows so popular. The parents have low levels of education, don't have books in the house, don't subscribe to a newspaper, and don't have high educational expectations for their kids. Many of them may be immigrants, and their kids may come into school with low English skills. The teachers are there because they couldn't get a job in a better school district. Incompetent teachers probably won't be fired (because of teachers' unions), and even if they were, there is no particular reason to believe that the school would be able to attract a replacement candidate who was any better. Families that have enough money to have a choice will choose to live in a better school district. Kids model their behavior on their peers'. They see that 60% of their peers don't do their homework. There isn't enough critical mass of kids to do geekly things like a chess club or a model rocket club. None of this changes if you just put more money, computers, etc., into the school.

      --
      Find free books.
    11. Re:Not all schools are equal by StarChamber · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Access to money or resources in general changes the problem.

      Apparently you are not familiar with the definitive research in this area. The Coleman Report (Equality of Educational Opportunity, 1966) contradicts your assertions and found:

      "Using data from over 600,000 students and teachers across the country, the researchers found that academic achievement was less related to the quality of a student's school, and more related to the social composition of the school, the student's sense of control of his environment and future, the verbal skills of teachers, and the student's family background."

      If you want to fix the slide in educational outcomes in the US, you need to stop spending on all the frills (no more monuments to technology and sports) and signifacntly raise the bar on educational expectations. Then we need to engage the parents and begin to educate them on their role in their child's education. Finally, we need to get rid of half of the administration staff in school districts. The upside to this approach is that we will free up a siginificant amount of money that can be used to hire more teachers and shrink classroom size.

      Our problem is not the quality of our teachers, it is the low level of expectations that we have placed upon our students, their peer groups, and their parents.

    12. Re:Not all schools are equal by nomadic · · Score: 2

      "In my (admittedly limited) experience, the teachers of technical subject in the lower schools are almost always incompetent. The explanation is well-known: If you're competent in math, why would you voluntarily spend your time in a low-paid job like grade-school teacher, when you could be making much better money elsewhere?" High skill in math is not needed to teach math to lower school students; what's more important is ability to teach.

    13. Re:Not all schools are equal by oldunixgeek · · Score: 2

      I somehow doubt you have any experimental evidence for this. From what I have seen, computers do a reasonable job of "training" which is not "education". Spending even more time with screens rather than people can only be harmful to the development of critically important social skills. If you just read many of the posts in this thread, I think you may get an idea of just how much our school system has been failing as of late at developing social skills.

    14. Re:Not all schools are equal by sizzzzlerz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And to fire teachers who cannot teach.

      And provide a decent, living wage to those who can teach and provide the resources and books to support them in their effort.

    15. Re:Not all schools are equal by kenh · · Score: 3, Interesting

      From the results I saw, using the computer program for fifteen minutes a day really helped. In the writing samples I saw, the students often went from making unintelligible scribbles to writing coherent paragraphs within a year.

      Imagine what those same students could have accomplished with the same 15 minutes with a real teacher...

      --
      Ken
    16. Re:Not all schools are equal by KhazadDum · · Score: 2

      That's a lot of words for saying "Hire people of quality, not gimmicks, technological or sociological." ;) But I agree with you nonetheless.

    17. Re:Not all schools are equal by thehodapp · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I am a current Computer Science student and even with my major, I must agree that most classes tended to waste time when we would use computers in high school. Most of the softer science teachers have kids use computers to make "Powerpoints" and "Videos" and waste a great deal of time doing fun, but generally useless stuff when we could have been learning actual history or English in a class discussion or lecture. I found the teachers that mostly avoided computers (besides the computer science teachers) were the teachers I tended to learn the most from.

      However, I still think computers are needed in schools especially in a society where nearly every white collar job requires the ability to use a computer. Also, computer classes, and similar computer-centric classes obviously are going to require a computer lab (at least). I also cannot even imagine how horrific it would be to have to use a typewriter to write all my papers...it's a shuddering thought. Perhaps an emphasis on learning the necessary skills for using a computer in a real life job, rather than an emphasis on integrating computers with existing teaching techniques would create a much more efficient system, while still preparing students for the job world.

    18. Re:Not all schools are equal by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      The kids in Silicon Valley are going to have plenty of tech exposure at home, they'll get engaged by it and pick it up for themselves without being taught how to do it. Learning without it in grammar school is going to broaden their skillset and their ability to pay attention to things that don't flash and beep.

    19. Re:Not all schools are equal by JoeMerchant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      A computerized lesson would (presumably) be done in the competent manner.

      Big presumption, I have seen plenty of crappy teaching software, and assuming that it is selected by the same time honored system that textbooks are chosen, we can assume that quality will have nothing to do with what is put on the school systems computers.

    20. Re:Not all schools are equal by tomhudson · · Score: 2

      Most real-life "computer jobs" don't need "computer learning". The workflow is predetermined, the range of inputs limited, etc.

      Most kids learn more than enough at home - they don't need labs at school, and whatever they learn will be obsolete multiple times before they graduate.

    21. Re:Not all schools are equal by Meski · · Score: 2

      Us kids from before computers in highschool were amazed by the early micros and built our own - it didn't have conventional keyboards, or screens, being able to insert extra opcodes was a luxury. Oh yeah, and get off my lawn! :^)

  2. No Computers? No Computers! by morari · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Good. Computers aren't needed outside of performing some research, actually typing out that essay, or putting together that presentation. You don't need fancy buildings and whizzbang gadgets to teach, you simply need inspiring people. Sadly, those type of people are at a premium nowadays. Even when you do find and employ them, the system generally does everything it can to get in their way and make their presence all but useless. This is a private school. so perhaps the rules are different. Maybe they can teach students how to do something other than fill in test bubbles.

    --
    "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
    1. Re:No Computers? No Computers! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You don't need fancy buildings and whizzbang gadgets to teach, you simply need inspiring people..

      True. But fancy buildings do help. Growing up, it was easy to see what society valued when we were being taught in crappy old, not well built new schools or portables. It definitely demotivates when everything that you look and smell at school screams at you that the adults don't care. Yea, I still learned one hell of a lot from my inspiring teaches, but even just the good ones tended to have less impact while in a portable or a room with leaks everywhere. You can't totally tune out the environment.

  3. Take a good thing too far... by Manip · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I agree that Computers are a distraction and do not aid learning in many subjects, I think this takes a good idea too far. Kids today do need to understand how to use computers - it is a needed skill for almost any and all jobs, from a Lawyer, to a Doctor, to an Engineer. While I agree that computers should be kept in the computer lab, let's not keep them out of schools entirely.

    1. Re:Take a good thing too far... by jschen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think people who are sending their children to this school will be able to teach their children the necessary computer skills just fine without the help of the school.

    2. Re:Take a good thing too far... by demonlapin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's grammar school, aka elementary.

    3. Re:Take a good thing too far... by kenh · · Score: 2

      Children won't be entering the workforce in any meaningful way before their 16th birthday, by which time the child will likely be 'exposed' to computers- this compulsion to inflict a child with an 'exposure' to computers is a bit silly, IMHO.

      A senior in high school would have been exposed to Windows 95 or 98, 2000, XP, Vista, and now Windows 7 - why did they have to learn to superficially use each OS while in school? How did that better prepare them for going to college, where they will use Windows 8?

      --
      Ken
  4. Feedback by Aladrin · · Score: 2

    I have yet to meet the piece of paper that gives immediate feedback, so it's not possible for pen and paper to teach as well as a computer... If the computer if programmed properly.

    --
    "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    1. Re:Feedback by jschen · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I also have yet to meet a piece of paper that gives immediate feedback. However, I have met teachers who can give better targeted and more useful feedback than any computer program. Learning tools are great, but perhaps a bit more emphasis should be given to inspiring and training more good teachers.

    2. Re:Feedback by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Oh pooh. Real life problems don't come with pre-programmed immediate answers. Immediate feedback encourages trail and error problem solving rather than thinking through the answers, and is very harmful.

    3. Re:Feedback by TWX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If the computer if programmed properly.

      You haven't seen the state of computer software for elementary school, have you?

      I've worked in IT for education for ten years. The wrong people are writing computer software for students. The wrong people are buying educational software. The wrong people are buying security software. The wrong people are implementing images and choices for things in the OS and for user-level security. And, a lot of the wrong people are maintaining the equipment.

      I believe that computers for students as a concept is a total failure. Kids don't use computers for education, they use them to play. They stimulate the dopamine centers of the brain with them, and when they don't get their fix they get whiny and crabby and they act out in class. Take away the computers from the room except for a teacher's workstation that's unobtrusive and I think that many of the problems in the modern classroom will go away.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    4. Re:Feedback by the+eric+conspiracy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Your Edison example is complete hogwash. His success with the light bulb included careful engineering of a complete system to enable production, delivery and the components to supply electrical illumination. Many other people where try all sorts of random components to build light bulbs. Edison was successful because of his systematic approach to the total problem.

  5. Can't teach your kids arithmetic? by russotto · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So an app on the iPad can't present any number of arithmetic problems and give a child feedback on right and wrong answers right away?

    You obviously don't need computers to teach, but to claim that can't be helpful is just Luddism.

    1. Re:Can't teach your kids arithmetic? by maxwell+demon · · Score: 2

      So an app on the iPad can't present any number of arithmetic problems and give a child feedback on right and wrong answers right away?

      Can't better. Now better than what (or more likely, who) is left open. Presumably better than a teacher. And I'm pretty sure that's right. The problem is that we cannot give every child his own teacher, and therefore the teacher will need to share his attention to many children. And with this situation, I'm not convinced that the combination of teacher and computer (it doesn't need to be an iPad) wouldn't work better than a teacher alone.

      Now if you try to replace the teacher with the computer ...

      --
      The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
    2. Re:Can't teach your kids arithmetic? by oldunixgeek · · Score: 2
      It has been absolutely proven beyond a doubt that people learn faster and more deeply when taking methamphetamine.

      I don't see anybody advocating for handing out the meth in schools.

      Why not?

      Because, along with the enhanced learning rate comes some rather unpleasant side effects.

      It's pretty much the same thing with computer use.

      The next time you see your older relatives using their iPhones notice how much time they spend ignoring people around them to stare at their phone screen during social functions.

      Scary.

      I'm singling out the older folks here because presumably they should know better but still they can't resist......

    3. Re:Can't teach your kids arithmetic? by Nyder · · Score: 2

      So an app on the iPad can't present any number of arithmetic problems and give a child feedback on right and wrong answers right away?

      You obviously don't need computers to teach, but to claim that can't be helpful is just Luddism.

      I think people are more upset about the idea that computers will replace the teachers. Your example is all good and stuff, until the kid has a question, the iPad won't answer. That's when he/she needs a human, at least, for now.

      but then, what exactly are you being taught in grammer school? Except English, most everything else is must memorizing crap. History is mostly memorizing dates, Math is all memorization. Same as Spelling. In fact, there is really very little a human needs to do in grammer school, cept keep the kids in line and hopefully figure out which ones need special attention, and then given it.

      But no, I'm not for replacing humans with computers in any level of school, 'cept maybe College. Education is probably one of the most important things we can give kids, and what does it show them when we don't care enough to give them the best education we can?

      --
      Be seeing you...
  6. Both My Kids GO To A Waldorf School by szyzyg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    They're pretty tech Savvy (Skye is even e-famous for playing Eve Online) but we felt that the school environment worked well for them. They're learning knitting as part of the hand skills but it's not just picking up some needles and yarn, they started out making their own yarn and needles - it's like those crazy hacker types who want to build their own computer and operating system :)

    1. Re:Both My Kids GO To A Waldorf School by szyzyg · · Score: 2

      Also, I feel the need to point out that this is a public charter school in Oakland, I don't pay any fees to send them there, but positions are limited. Most Waldorf schools are private. Truthfully I wasn't looking for specifically for a Waldorf school, we were just looking around for schools that were most likely to provide a good education.

  7. Luddite High. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The problem isn't computers, the problem that other school districts face isn't the lack of great teachers.

    The problem is socioeconomic. These kids are fucking upper crust yuppies. No shit they're going to turn out good results. It's easy to say that hitting a triple is easy when you were born on third base.

    I wonder how their Computer Science curriculum is. I hope they don't have them break out pencil and paper and make them write down opcodes like Woz did in the fuckin' 70's optimizing disk drive routines.

    --
    Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    1. Re:Luddite High. by glodime · · Score: 2

      I agree that socioeconomic effects are a real issue in education. However, I doubt that the "no computers" elementary school has a Computer Science curriculum.

  8. Re:Clearly can't teach english either... by demonlapin · · Score: 2

    It's a perfectly grammatical sentence, akin to "I can better serve the cause by doing X rather than Y."

  9. But deep-tissue massage in the classroom is OK... by erac3rx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just a little background here. My wife, two boys and I recently relocated back to the bay area. My son (and wife and I) interviewed at the Waldorf school, and my son was admitted. We decided not to have him attend because 1) the cost was high (roughly $15K a year for 3 half-days a week for a pre-schooler) and 2) the people making decisions there are little bit... eccentric. They made it very clear that they are anti-computers and anti-video (TV or videos of any sort). That's fine, if a bit unrealistic. Next they let us know that the teachers provided deep-tissue massage to the kids during each day's nap time. And explained how cell phones and electromagnetic radiation are giving people cancer. And talked about how a montessori education (aka actual learning in the classroom versus solely focusing on play as they do for preschoolers at Waldorf) isn't effective at an early age. I'm fine with these folks taking whatever positions they like, but I don't need my son to go to a school that believes technology is evil and learning is inappropriate in a preschool classroom. We're paying roughly the same money for my son to attend a montessori school nearby (5 half-days a week) and are pretty happy with it. To each their own, but honestly the attitudes present there really didn't work for my family.

  10. No parents? No parents! by nido · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You don't need fancy buildings and whizzbang gadgets to teach, you simply need inspiring people.

    You're referring to "parents", right?

    I know the standardized system devalues the contributions parents make to their children's education, but for the first several years parents make an enormous contribution to the molding of their offspring.

    The real success of the public system is in the systematic removal of parents from the process. Makes it much easier to mold people's thinking patterns...

    John Taylor Gatto says to keep your kids out of school for as long as possible. Skipping Kindgergarten, first, and second grades are most important.

    --
    Learn the rules so you know how to break them properly.
    www.teslabox.com
  11. Re:Not about attention by Strider- · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Children are taught to write in cursive, wich is a torture to most, for years. Handwriting is an obsolete skill they will never use in their lives. This time would be much better spent by teaching them typing that they will need every day.

    I don't know what planet you live on, but neat, legible handwriting is still absolutely required in nearly any industry. Case in point, a friend of mine ordered some copper walled cavity filters for VHF radio repeater. He specified that the cavities were to be made from 1.0mm wall thickness tubing. Unfortunately the guy who took the order couldn't write worth crap, and the machinist who built the unit read that as 10mm wall thickness.

    As an Engineer myself, most of my work is done on computers, but my note taking and what not is still done in long-hand. Under our corporate rules, we have to do this, and sign/date the pages as we go. The whole point is that these notebooks can then be legally used as evidence should there be any patent dispute or the like. A signed, and dated page from an Engineer's notebook is much better evidence of prior art than some computer file you dug up.

    --
    ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
  12. That would be a Steiner/Waldorf School? by Bazman · · Score: 5, Informative

    Described as "Mystical Barmpottery" (a lovely english expression we should all use more):

    http://www.dcscience.net/?p=3528

    and some wonderful racism in there too:

    http://www.dcscience.net/?p=3853

      The only Waldorf I'd want my kids taught by is the one who sits next to Statdler on The Muppet Show.

    1. Re:That would be a Steiner/Waldorf School? by sharph · · Score: 2

      I went to a Waldorf preschool as a kid. They are nutty. I was an early reader which was something the school wasn't too happy with. I also really liked technology at a young age, which was also discouraged. I remember going to friends houses and having computer games, electric guitar, etc, be a taboo, even though all the kids were doing those things.

      And yeah, besides educational practices, there's a certain amount of psuedoscience and woo, for example the belief that the phase of the moon determines a good time to plant crops. (See biodynamic farming.)

  13. Re:Irony by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Aren't these the same technology companies that constantly complain about the skills shortage which necessitates importation of foreign workers to work at these very companies? The emperor truly has no clothes.

    Computers are great when they're not just chucked in to a job for the sake of it, and their use has to be very carefully managed; the same is true for adults. I've delivered training in corporate environments in which I've repeatedly had to ask ask adults to stop pressing keys and clicking mouse buttons. Because of this I would generally have people face away from their computers, or put them to sleep, when I need them to be listening to me.

    The same things happens in meetings. Some time back a senior manager pulled me aside at the end of a meeting because she thought I'd been writing email and otherwise messing around with the computer during our meeting. In that case I could show her the very detailed and structured notes I'd written for the attendees. I understand her misconception, as would anyone else who's look around in a meeting at the people around them, checking email and doing anything but paying attention. It's difficult to have computers present without people fiddling around. In those cases, when I run a meeting, I'll ask people to close the lids on their machines unless they can give a good reason for sitting in my room with their eyes and hands occupied by their little box of light.

    It makes sense in schools that the use of computers is very tightly controlled. Buying computers without forming a cohesive strategy for integrating them in to the curriculum is like a school district placing an order for "a big box of really good books".

    On thing I liked about the way I studied statistics was that before touching computers we'd learn to do things manually, with graph paper. I wouldn't need to do this now, yet having learnt this way I have a better understand of what underlies the figures. It's not uncommon in the corporate world to be handed a set of figures and charts, produced by the Excel whiz who'll return a blank look if asked about standard deviation, percentiles, or heaven forbid if anyone should ask about averages beyond the mean. This is why we really shouldn't be too eager to get kids straight on to computers or even calculators. Computers are the learning tool, too easily becoming the lesson if not properly planned for.

  14. blackboards by nerdyalien · · Score: 2

    I am always surprised to see the heavy usage of blackboard at places like Stanford, MIT (check http://www.academicearth.org./ Even some of the later successes, like the Khan Academy or Paddy Hirsch's financial market mini-lectures, are primarily relying on blackboard centered teaching methods. One may disagree, but I still think analog-alike blackboard based teaching is still the best, compared to power-point based lectures.

    Overall, I consider technology is merely "a tool" to get information faster and crunch numbers faster. Still, education or any other intellectual pursuit is down to heavy-use-of-brain, discipline, and hard work/perseverance. And yes, I do not deny, having good teachers is always a plus.

  15. Depends on the subject: need balance by Roger+W+Moore · · Score: 2

    It's been going onto 30 years now and there hasn't been a SINGLE study showing computers help

    I'd like to see how you successfully teach pupils to use and program computers without using any. I agree that there is a lot of ill-conceived use of technology in education at the moment - using a computer does not magically make things better. However to completely ban them from a school is an equal and opposite over-reaction. We all have to learn to deal with computers because on a day-to-day basis we all use them so it is just a irresponsible to exclude computers from a school education as it is to attempt to cram them into every possible subject.

    1. Re:Depends on the subject: need balance by fikx · · Score: 2

      "I'd like to see how you successfully teach pupils to use and program computers without using any."

      If you can't think of how to do this, then you don't have much imagination. Most of the better programmers and users I know are ones that learned before computers were so common, and learned a lot "on paper" before getting to actually practice on the real computer.

      And I'm curious if the school on the article is talking about putting computers in front of students, the teachers using computers or both...

      --
      AB HOC POSSUM VIDERE DOMUM TUUM
    2. Re:Depends on the subject: need balance by Hognoxious · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'd like to see how you successfully teach pupils to use and program computers without using any.

      As others have pointed out, the fundamental principles of logic can be taught with paper. But in any case, that's one specific subject.

      Bats, balls and mitts are good for playing baseball. Does that mean they should be an integral part of Spanish? Test tubes are darn useful in chemistry, but would you try to build an economics curriculum around them?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    3. Re:Depends on the subject: need balance by kenh · · Score: 2

      The article if for a Waldorf School, which is, I believe either K-6 or K-8 - how much C++ programming are kids in 5th grade doing? How much Pascal? Smalltalk? BASIC? When kids in these grades are taught programming it is typically in a fantasy play environment designed to teach children abstract programming concepts.

      There is plenty for a child to learn without cluttering up their day with 'programming classes' at the elementary level - very, very few elementary schools have wood, metal, or auto shops, are we neglecting those children with an aptitude for such classes by not offering them? No. Same for computers.

      --
      Ken
  16. Re:Not about attention by futuresheep · · Score: 2
    Scoliosis isn't caused by hauling around a ton of heavy books.

    http://www.webmd.com/osteoarthritis/guide/arthritis-scoliosis

    There are many types and causes of scoliosis, including:

    Congenital scoliosis. Due to a bone abnormality present at birth. Neuromuscular scoliosis. A result of abnormal muscles or nerves. Frequently seen in people with spina bifida or cerebral palsy or in those with various conditions that are accompanied by, or result in, paralysis.
    Degenerative scoliosis. This may result from traumatic (from an injury or illness) bone collapse, previous major back surgery, or osteoporosis (thining of the bones).
    Idiopathic scoliosis. The most common type of scoliosis, idiopathic scoliosis, has no specific identifiable cause. There are many theories, but none have been found to be conclusive. There is, however, strong evidence that idiopathic scoliosis is inherited.

    Cursive may be harder to learn, but once learned it much more efficient than block writing is. Most efficient is a combination of the two styles, but without learning cursive first students will never get there.

    The internet IS a very useful source of information, but what you're describing isn't any different than learning to find the resources you need at your local library.

    Could you be more specific about:

    Which skills are being replaced? How the internet replaces a quality library and teacher?

  17. Re:Not about attention by Hentes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know what planet you live on, but neat, legible handwriting is still absolutely required in nearly any industry. Case in point, a friend of mine ordered some copper walled cavity filters for VHF radio repeater. He specified that the cavities were to be made from 1.0mm wall thickness tubing. Unfortunately the guy who took the order couldn't write worth crap, and the machinist who built the unit read that as 10mm wall thickness.

    This just shows one of the disadvantages of using cursive.

    As an Engineer myself, most of my work is done on computers, but my note taking and what not is still done in long-hand. Under our corporate rules, we have to do this, and sign/date the pages as we go. The whole point is that these notebooks can then be legally used as evidence should there be any patent dispute or the like. A signed, and dated page from an Engineer's notebook is much better evidence of prior art than some computer file you dug up.

    You can write whatever you want in a notebook with your handwriting, sign it and date it back, it will be impossible to tell. This is just an example of a bad law that will hopefully get fixed by the time the kids of today finish school.

  18. flid by Hognoxious · · Score: 4, Funny

    You have to consciously think about making the shapes of letters when handwriting? Seriously?

    Please tell me you don't drive and only walk outside under adult supervision.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    1. Re:flid by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2

      There are other concerns, such as "can I fit the next word on the rest of this line, or should I start a new line?" And for me (being left-handed), I have to be careful not to smear the ink/lead.

  19. Waldorf = wacky. No computers for kids != wacky. by Organic+Brain+Damage · · Score: 2

    It's unfortunate that the merit of computer and television use by 5-12 yr olds is wrapped up with the Waldorf schools. A broken clock is right twice a day and limiting kids' exposure to computers and TV (screens in our household) is the two times Waldorf gets it right. If you want to raise your kids to be intellectuals relative to their peers, all you have to do is ban screen time in your household and provide plenty of engaging books and spend time reading to your kids. As for schools and quality, all I really see are generally high quality schools in Minnesota. Both public and private. The difference is almost 100% in the home, but criticising parenting is not in vogue, so we do not discuss this publicly.

  20. Re:Not about attention by futuresheep · · Score: 2

    Part of the learning process as you grow is simply learning that some things that may seam dull and dreary can lead to a skill that make learning other things easier. Math tables, spelling, and cursive all fall in this category. Besides, typing is easily learned simply by learning the basics of hand position and then typing a lot. I'll also go out on a limb and say that the prevalence of home computers gives kids ample time outside of school to hone their typing skills.

  21. Re:Not about attention by futuresheep · · Score: 2

    There's a lot of value in going to the library, finding the books you need, and using them to take the notes you need for the research you're doing. On it's own there's a lot of value in the simple process of taking notes down on paper itself:

    http://www.slideshare.net/luscher/optimising-the-use-of-notetaking-as-an-external-cognitive-aid-for-increasing-learning

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1636926/

    A physicist doesn't need to know calculus? How does that physicist make it through basic college physics classes without understanding some of the math behind their chosen field? And CAD is still drawing out a blueprint, it's just a different medium. I guarantee you though, if you talked to any architect these days they'd tell you that their ideas all begin as rough sketches on paper. There are still architectural schools that require taking classes with a drafting board and a parallel rule.

    These people that use Wolfram Alpha, or CAD for everything are your low level monkeys in their field. They're no different from a help desk tech that uses google to solve every problem.

  22. DO HO HO HO Holy crap by lolcutusofbong · · Score: 2

    I lived through six months of a cult-camp run by people who fully believed in Waldorf schools, were high-ranking members of the Avatar cult (Scientology fork), and kept their son's placenta in a chest freezer in the garage - the same freezer where they stored food. I didn't think they could get any nuttier, but this just raised the bar by an order of magnitude. I smelled a rat when they talked about not teaching kids to read before 8 or so, but this is ridiculous.

  23. Re:Not about attention by romiz · · Score: 2

    Cursive is not easily legible, and clearly the wrong choice in a world where you are not going to write long texts with a quill. Like other antiquated handwriting scripts, it is obsolete and should be reserved to specific cases.

    Just teach the kids to spell correctly, and write legibly with block letters. If they want to learn calligraphy, let them learn it during art lessons, instead of basic school training.

  24. 10 Crack Commandments by utkonos · · Score: 2

    Do you think that crack dealers smoke their own crack? Do heroin dealers shoot heroin? The answer is the successful ones never do. Computers are a distraction. If you have a good teacher who can engage you and get you to learn, why distract from that? To quote The Notorious B.I.G.: "Number four: know you heard this before Never get high on your own supply Number five: never sell no crack where you rest at I don't care if they want a ounce, tell em bounce"

  25. Re:But deep-tissue massage in the classroom is OK. by Hero+Zzyzzx · · Score: 5, Informative

    My 11 year old daughter has attended a Waldorf school practically since birth and, while there are definitely uber-hippies and a few anti-vaxxers, her school is nothing like you describe. Waldorf schools reflect their leadership, and if nuts are in charge the school is nutty (like every organization, really). There is none of this deep tissue crap, none of this anti-wifi hysteria - please don't paint all Waldorf schools with the same brush because they aren't all the same. It's been a great education and my daughter does just fine with computers - and has even programmed a little python on an OLPC. For some reason - probably because they end up loving to learn and haven't had creativity beaten out of them - many Waldorf kids end up going into the sciences. They end up fine, because appropriate things are taught at appropriate times.

    The play focus in preschool is totally appropriate - and IS learning. At that age, kids need to learn how to interact with each other and solve their own problems as peers, and play (and storytelling, another huge part of early Waldorf education) is one of the best ways of "teaching" that. It lays a foundation for kids that're able to interact in healthy ways and solve problems on their own. How many smart people have you met that're unable to deal with interpersonal problems or even minor conflicts?

    Anyway - I am not a blinder wearing Waldorf fanboy. There are some wacky things (Eurythmy? hokay. . .), but the end results of a good Waldorf school are hard to argue with. They end up being well rounded, centered kids who by and large kick ass in high school and end up happy.

  26. Re:The poverty of practice in the classroom by colinrichardday · · Score: 2

    You believe that critical thinking is a skill. If I simply took your word for it, I wouldn't be much of a critical thinker, now would I?

  27. Re:The poverty of practice in the classroom by colinrichardday · · Score: 2

    Critical thinking may be a requirement for problem solving, but that doesn't make it a skill. Also, is problem solving the only purpose of critical thinking?