Worst Ed-Tech Debacles of the Decade • Hacker News Board

Re: Worst Ed-Tech Debacles of the Decade

#121

Post by Bahamut » Sat, Jan 04, 2020, 8:17 PM UTC

username90 wrote: post #118

j45 wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having worked in and around EdTech in both industry for longer than most I meet.. a few themes seem to arise regularly that explain why so much of EdTech is stuck in the past., including hiring: - academic institutions generally have leadership inept at understanding technology - when academics try to make decisions by committee about technology when they are not competent in tech, it rarely works out - few academics…

> Math hasn’t changed in 500 years. What do you mean? Almost all math you learn in college were invented in the last 500 years. I think the last big things in math which they teach in undergrad were invented 50 years ago, so it is still a bit stale, but not that stale.

Most math you learn in undergrad was invented 200-300 years ago - 50-200 years ago is grad level material.

Re: Worst Ed-Tech Debacles of the Decade

#122

Post by a_geeky_bro » Sat, Jan 04, 2020, 8:41 PM UTC

newguy1234 wrote: post #54

impendia wrote: post #45

As a university professor, I'm struck at how few of these I've heard of -- and, of those which I've heard of, how little I care. I just don't feel like I have problems which I'm itching to have solved by technology. As an example of this, I've graded thousands of calculus exams in my career. It's time consuming, it's painful, and it's unpleasant. But it's also inevitable. Looking at my students' work, engaging with t…

Khan Academy already automated that. I know their math curriculum is pretty decent. https://www.khanacademy.org/math/ap-calculus-ab

Did you even read OP's comment? They specifically mentioned the need to engage with students' work to survey their (mis)understandings.

The link you posted to Khan does not automate that delicate balance between teacher and student. It's a bunch of videos of Khan describing the Chain Rule. The "practice" sections are mundane - multiple choice questions or fill in the blanks. You simply cannot (as an educator) see the (mis)understandings of students like this. You need to pour over their work. Take note of where patterns occur and address them next class. Iterative. Do you honestly think Khan has "automated" that?

This thread is full of asinine comments like yours that demonstrate just how much people in tech _don't_ understand what it's like to teach. Hence the original link to 100 fuck ups by engineers, product people, and VCs.

Re: Worst Ed-Tech Debacles of the Decade

#123

Post by mandukya » Sat, Jan 04, 2020, 8:47 PM UTC

geomark wrote: post #112

iruby wrote: post #101

It’s truly fascinating how people quickly join echo chambers and often neglect thinking critically about the opinions they propagate. In computer programming, as an example, 1970s and 80s research points to many problems and dangers of wishful thinking guiding the inclusion of programming on early stages of the school curriculum. To this day, many efforts bypass these alerts and focus on engagement rather than learni…

I'd like to hear more about dangers of including programming in early stages. Can you comment or link to something about it?

I think he’s talking about forever-newbie / perpetual rookie syndrome.

Re: Worst Ed-Tech Debacles of the Decade

#124

Post by MCablestudent » Mon, Jan 06, 2020, 9:52 AM UTC

The focus should be to find a proven curriculum that fits the Ed-Tech format and experienced educators to adapted it.

Re: Worst Ed-Tech Debacles of the Decade

#125

Post by mattmcknight » Thu, Jan 09, 2020, 12:20 PM UTC

throw_away wrote: post #49

mattmcknight wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It has been tried. https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2010/4/13/students-result...

Those who don't click the link may assume that the result was unsuccessful, but FTA: "Although critics have long argued that paying students for results can lead to a decreased interest in learning, Fryer’s new results show no evidence to justify or support these claims." That said, the researcher found that while paying students for results didn't cause harm, they did find that what worked even better (that is, work…

I think the key thing they discovered was that it was more effective to pay struggling kids for the activities that lead to better grades than to pay them for the grades themselves.

Re: Worst Ed-Tech Debacles of the Decade

#126

Post by throw_away » Fri, Jan 10, 2020, 1:34 AM UTC

mattmcknight wrote: post #125

throw_away wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those who don't click the link may assume that the result was unsuccessful, but FTA: "Although critics have long argued that paying students for results can lead to a decreased interest in learning, Fryer’s new results show no evidence to justify or support these claims." That said, the researcher found that while paying students for results didn't cause harm, they did find that what worked even better (that is, work…

I think the key thing they discovered was that it was more effective to pay struggling kids for the activities that lead to better grades than to pay them for the grades themselves.

Might not be limited to just struggling kids. Might not be limited to just kids.

It's interesting to think about what implications this might have for our own, grown up adult incentive mechanisms. Is it such a great idea to gate pretty much everything on results, when a) this is at least partially subject to chance and b) workers might not quite know what to do to achieve those results.