I'll ask a basic question which you might have answered in another post: given the overwhelming evidence that digital distractions have caused educational outcomes to plummet, why do schools continue to insist on using laptops and iPads, and now AI, in the classroom? It goes against all common sense. If I have trouble focusing with the equivalent of a TV and more on my desk during work, surely it's obvious that children would have even more trouble?
100% agree, and I wish I knew. Usually the response is something like "They will use computers in their jobs, so if they don't use them now they will be unprepared." This argument might work for high school students but it definitely doesn't for elementary school students. (Especially when they give them tablets, which are associated with entertainment even more).
I wonder about the style of teaching over the last couple of decades as well. The philosophy behind “common core” where it concerns math makes sense, it’s about learning why the math works. However, where learning how is appropriate when it pertains to calculus and further, more basic math is about memorization. That’s the groundwork laid for later extrapolation. Add in that such requires cognitive development that comes with age, and the new teaching is requiring younger students to think as if they’re several years ahead of where they actually are developmentally. Then there’s the activism of high school teachers becoming similar to college professors. This goes beyond grade inflation to a diminished requirement for students to analyze or be able to read anything, replacing it with regurgitating talking points. I know several teachers, admittedly those who teach English so critical theory is ascendant, but even in advanced classes barely require any reading, but do love giving presentation assignments about how the stories highlight modern fascism, note the evils of capitalism, and so on. Actual reading isn’t important, only right-think.
I've heard that many high school English classes no longer require students to read books, only short stories and essays. That could definitely have an impact. (And also not prepare them for college, where they will be handed 700-page textbooks).
Exactly. I was just reading the other day about professors noting that kids are passing grades without even knowing how to read. Then there's the lack of analytical skills, or the emotional resilience to get through hundreds of pages of material (itself also a problem attributable to technology). Honestly, depending on the college, the textbooks may be large, but there's not a lot of reading required, depending on the school and program. Even in a doctoral program, I've had teachers declare that there's no need to read the whole journal article, just the abstract and conclusion.
I don't want to fall into the "blame the teachers," but as well I don't want to ignore the seismic shift in how teachers view their jobs now, as opposed to decades ago.
I'll ask a basic question which you might have answered in another post: given the overwhelming evidence that digital distractions have caused educational outcomes to plummet, why do schools continue to insist on using laptops and iPads, and now AI, in the classroom? It goes against all common sense. If I have trouble focusing with the equivalent of a TV and more on my desk during work, surely it's obvious that children would have even more trouble?
100% agree, and I wish I knew. Usually the response is something like "They will use computers in their jobs, so if they don't use them now they will be unprepared." This argument might work for high school students but it definitely doesn't for elementary school students. (Especially when they give them tablets, which are associated with entertainment even more).
I wonder about the style of teaching over the last couple of decades as well. The philosophy behind “common core” where it concerns math makes sense, it’s about learning why the math works. However, where learning how is appropriate when it pertains to calculus and further, more basic math is about memorization. That’s the groundwork laid for later extrapolation. Add in that such requires cognitive development that comes with age, and the new teaching is requiring younger students to think as if they’re several years ahead of where they actually are developmentally. Then there’s the activism of high school teachers becoming similar to college professors. This goes beyond grade inflation to a diminished requirement for students to analyze or be able to read anything, replacing it with regurgitating talking points. I know several teachers, admittedly those who teach English so critical theory is ascendant, but even in advanced classes barely require any reading, but do love giving presentation assignments about how the stories highlight modern fascism, note the evils of capitalism, and so on. Actual reading isn’t important, only right-think.
I've heard that many high school English classes no longer require students to read books, only short stories and essays. That could definitely have an impact. (And also not prepare them for college, where they will be handed 700-page textbooks).
Exactly. I was just reading the other day about professors noting that kids are passing grades without even knowing how to read. Then there's the lack of analytical skills, or the emotional resilience to get through hundreds of pages of material (itself also a problem attributable to technology). Honestly, depending on the college, the textbooks may be large, but there's not a lot of reading required, depending on the school and program. Even in a doctoral program, I've had teachers declare that there's no need to read the whole journal article, just the abstract and conclusion.
I don't want to fall into the "blame the teachers," but as well I don't want to ignore the seismic shift in how teachers view their jobs now, as opposed to decades ago.