Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The technology pushed into schools today is a threat to child development

americanaffairsjournal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–295 of 295 posts

Re: The technology pushed into schools today is a threat to child development

#291

Post by daxfohl »

sethammons wrote: post #269
daxfohl wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My eldest is in first grade and so far I'm not a fan of the Common Core math. I could make a cynical conspiracy argument that much of it is designed around promotion of the type of technology presented in the article. "Carry the one" is the simplest thing to explain with a pencil and a blank piece of paper. All the additional Common Core techniques seem to require some kind of visual representation, either via the ga…

What if the "one way" doesn't work for some students where an alternative way does? What if the "one way" is interpreted as the only way? A large complaint about math from students (pre common core) is that there is too much memorization. "Is x^1 or x^0 1, or was it 0?" When math is a bunch of memorizations, students can't apply it outside of canned prompts. The goal is to build mathematical literacy and understandin…

I somewhat think the opposite though. When you're given ten ways to do it, then it's information overload and you end up just memorizing those ten ways. When you're given one way to do it then not only do you have a way to do it that will always work, but also it leaves your brain ready to find further ways to do it on its own. And that's how thing start to make sense and stick.

Basically, I think for good students, CC just makes them memorize stuff they'd come up with on their own, and for poor students it creates too much confusion such that memorization isn't even effective anymore.

Re: The technology pushed into schools today is a threat to child development

#292

Post by daxfohl »

IggleSniggle wrote: post #206
daxfohl wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> if I'm adding 47 to 54, I can simplify that by instead adding 50 (47 + 3) to 57 (54 + 3), which is 107 47+53=107??? Haha, okay I get it, it was a slip. But it's kind of the point from my perspective. All these different techniques of moving stuff around seems fraught with ways to misunderstand it or muck it up. At best they should be supplementary skills, and shouldn't be taught as the primary techniques. Per Commo…

I dunno. Having an intuition for why 12x6=72, etc all the way on up through integrals, Taylor series, and the rest of K-12 math just seems a lot more intellectually stimulating, and therefore useful to the development of the mind to me. I never understood the kids who "just wanted to know how to get the answer." Like, any monkey can follow a protocol. Why does it work? That's the brain muscle worth growing. Mathemati…

I agree in principle. Just the implementation of common core seems backwards. My kid is struggling to make sense of it, and I don't have any good way of helping her because it all seems backwards to me. I did teach her carry the one, like I learned, and she picked it right up. But I stopped that too because I didn't want to confuse her. So now I'm somewhat clueless what to do to help. The teacher recommended those dumb video games, after we've worked all our lives to limit her screen time.

That's why I say common core, even though the goal is more understanding and less memorization, actually leads toward the opposite.

Re: The technology pushed into schools today is a threat to child development

#293

Post by nl »

Quiark wrote: post #290
nl wrote: post #181

Can anyone find a source for that "Give Students a Laptop to Knock off Half a Letter Grade" graph? It is credited to PISA, but isn't mentioned in the references section and isn't obvious in the PISA publications list: https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/pisa_19963777?page=1 I wonder if technology here is actually a proxy variable for country?

Also can't find it, even if I google the label. All I can get is another study which finds the same but attributes it to distraction

Isn't it ironic that the complaint is about technology, and yet none of us can find anything to back up the claim?

Re: The technology pushed into schools today is a threat to child development

#294

Post by filoleg »

BlueTemplar wrote: post #284
filoleg wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, there was something special about the Russian translation of LotR? I totally missed it then, because that's how I read LotR as a kid (translated Russian version), and I have never re-visited the book since then, as I was not a big fan of the movies (which, I know, is almost a sacrilegious thing to admit, given the reactions I've received for saying it irl).

Haha, I knew it ! Let me guess, you read the "big single dark brown book" version too ? It might be just the children nostalgia though... (Had the same reaction to the movies initially !) I've also seen much later a translation that seemed to be designed "for kids" and that seemed godawful to me !

Unfortunately, I think I might have read the newer translation. I don't have it anymore, but iirc I got the book around 2005-2006, and it might have been brown underneath, but it had that glossy art cover over it that I took off only once to check out how it looked without it.

Re: The technology pushed into schools today is a threat to child development

#295

Post by BlueTemplar »

filoleg wrote: post #294
BlueTemplar wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Haha, I knew it ! Let me guess, you read the "big single dark brown book" version too ? It might be just the children nostalgia though... (Had the same reaction to the movies initially !) I've also seen much later a translation that seemed to be designed "for kids" and that seemed godawful to me !

Unfortunately, I think I might have read the newer translation. I don't have it anymore, but iirc I got the book around 2005-2006, and it might have been brown underneath, but it had that glossy art cover over it that I took off only once to check out how it looked without it.

Hah, completely forgot about that, it got lost pretty quickly...
Post reply on HN