Wozniak Gets Personal On Innovation

snydeq writes "Companies are doggedly pursuing the next big thing in technology, but nothing seems to be pointing to the right way these days, claims the legendary Steve Wozniak. The reason? 'You tend to deal with the past,' replicating what you know in a new form. Consider the notion of computing eyeware like Google Glass: 'People have been marrying eyewear with TV inputs for 20 years,' Wozniak says. True innovation, Wozniak claims, becomes more human, more personal. People use technology more the less it feels like technology. 'The software gets more accepted when it works in human ways — meaning in noncomputer ways.' Here, Wozniak says, is the key to technology's role in the education system." And no amount of technology can save the American education system: "We put the technology into a system that damages creative thinking — the kids give up, and at a very early age."

Comments

I blame textbook monopolies.

[Narcocide]

And no amount of technology can save the American education system: "We put the technology into a system that damages creative thinking — the kids give up, and at a very early age."

Open Source the curriculum, damnit!

Re:I blame textbook monopolies.

[ThatsDrDangerToYou]

And no amount of technology can save the American education system: "We put the technology into a system that damages creative thinking — the kids give up, and at a very early age."

Open Source the curriculum, damnit!

Well, the American system is flawed in nearly every direction:

• Overemphasis on testing
• Disengaged parents
• Underpaid teachers
• De-motivated and disempowered teachers
• Inadequate funding (especially in poorer neighborhoods)
• Kids used to passive "entertainment"
• Poor diets
• Administrative inertia
• Cultural bias against education

I could go on and on obviously. There is no one cause and no silver bullet solution. Technology can be part of the solution, but in the hands of morons it quickly becomes part of the problem.

Re:I blame textbook monopolies.

[erroneus]

But it doesn't escape administrative inertia, cultural bias, and more importantly (and not mentioned) extreme government regulation of curricula. There are those who theorize this is all "by design." It's hard to imagine because no one wants to believe it. I had a pretty decent educational experience even if I didn't 'get it' at an early enough age due to a touch of ASD. (I'm actually glad it wasn't diagnosed back then -- I likely wouldn't have been forced to deal with it and adapt. These days when people are diagnosed with a 'condition' they quickly give up and get comfortable in their cozy little category.)

But we also have this culture of blame and lawyers who think the answer is to sue everyone and everything into oblivion. The system is more interested in protecting itself than in doing their jobs well.

Re:I blame textbook monopolies.

[femtobyte]

Give schools the power to fire bad teachers and you can give back power to good teachers.

Well, you may just end up giving that power to upper management, who has no idea who the good teachers are, only who is best at gaming the "teach-to-the-test" system. The only other thing management has to go on is firing people to save the most money (more senior, experienced teachers). Unless you're very careful to give teachers a strong voice in management decisions --- through, e.g., strong, local, democratic unions --- "fire bad teachers" will become "fire teachers who take on difficult students/subjects, and think outside the test."

Re:I blame textbook monopolies.

[Chris Mattern]

Oh come on, kids have been watching TV, listening music and reading books for many generations.

Kids have been watching TV for about two or three generations. They've been listening passively to music for perhaps four or five (before recording, people who wanted to hear music mostly performed it themselves--having visiting performers was a special occasion). Reading is a much less passive activity than the the other two, requiring the reader to interpret the written text.

Re:I blame textbook monopolies.

[Chris Mattern]

Unless you're very careful to give teachers a strong voice in management decisions --- through, e.g., strong, local, democratic unions --- "fire bad teachers" will become "fire teachers who take on difficult students/subjects, and think outside the test."

The problem is, if you *do* give strong teacher unions all the power, "fire bad teachers" becomes "never fire teachers at all, under any circumstances."

Re:I blame textbook monopolies.

[malvcr]

To watch TV and to hear music is useless because they are oriented to commercial goals, they are not intended to teach anybody useful things. With clear exceptions (let me see ... BBC, BBC ... BBC ... ).

Right now I am hearing Arthur Honegger: "Une Cantate de Noël" in Youtube, and I suppose nobody knows this music because of standard TV or Radio ... even, I doubt people, in general, knows that Honegger even exist as a composer or that there is this option to find good modern music; let me see, 6801 people saw this including me. Another test ... Samuel Barber (a very important US composer) ... "Summer Music" ... 958 views ... and a last one ... Miley Cyrus - "Wrecking Ball" ... 523,997,788 views ....

I think everything is said.

He hit the nail on the head...

[gestalt_n_pepper]

And the tech community says, "Ouchie" and runs back to their offices. I've been lecturing developers on this for years, and gotten little but hostility back. When you tell them "The fucking computer DOES NOT MATTER" they just look at you blankly.

The computer. It's a toaster, OK? It should turn on immediately. Do what the fuck I tell it to do and stay out of my face. It's not even a servant. It's *less* than a servant. It deserves no regard whatsoever.

More to the point, the toaster should not ask me a bunch of questions, steal my input focus, wait for it's little processes to complete in the foreground before moving on, take minutes to start, or stop, refresh my screen randomly, puke out unhelpful pointless error messages that require my attention, and so on. Aside from all of this being a sign of lazy, careless design and programming, all of this will drive consumers to devices that *don't* do this, or do it less. This is one reason among many why Android is taking over the world, while Windows is dying a well deserved death from it's ossified, well preserved stupidity.