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

The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

afterbabel.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 528 posts

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#101

Post by Parfait__ »

donatj wrote: post #10

I work in EdTech, I have for a very long time now, and the problem I have seen is no one in education is willing to ACTUALLY let kids learn at their own level. The promise of EdTech was that kids could learn where they are. A kid who's behind can actually continue to learn rather than being left behind. A kid who's ahead can be nurtured. We had this. It worked well, in my opinion at least, and the number of complaint…

I think it's weird that you're not telling us what "things they shouldn't be" are. There are plenty of things I think kids shouldn't be learning.

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#102

Post by obscurette »

psychoslave wrote: post #34
throw_pm23 wrote: post #20

The teaching method I find best is a teacher explaining and writing with chalk on the blackboard, and the students taking handwritten notes on paper, asking whenever something is not clear. In other words, the most boring classical setup possible. Of course all the nuances and little details make all the difference: board picture, structure, teacher personality, pacing, choice of topic, interaction, motivation, excit…

I have no doubt it is the best option. For certain people. But why impose a single way to learn, when there is no such a thing as a "single size fit them all" learning experience? All the more when there are alternative options.

There is. There is a ton of alternative schools, homeschooling is legal in most of places in the world etc. The problem is that people expect teachers adopt to every single pupil. It's not possible.

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#104

Post by WillPostForFood »

boohoo123 wrote: post #66

The teachers, the tools, the curriculum are not the problem. The No Child Left Behind Act is the problem. When everyone passes regardless if they learned anything or not, literacy skills are going to go down. You used to stay in a grade until you passed that grades curriculum, now everyone gets a pass. There are no consequences, resulting in no incentive to learn. Repeating 8th grade while all your friends move to hi…

FWIW, No Child Left Behind is no longer law, it was replaced in 2015.

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#105

Post by Vegenoid »

jerf wrote: post #35
Fin_Code wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Customized skill based education should be the future.

The problem is that it should be the present. Oh, I've been an engineer for a while and I know the system can't turn on a dime, it would take some time. However, we should be seeing visible progress towards this goal, and frankly, if anything, the system continues to be moving in the other direction, lowering bars to try to get everyone into the exact same level long after it should be clear that lowering the bar sti…

Large bureaucracy wants people to be as fungible as possible, so that systems can be designed that interact with fungible units instead of complex, multifaceted individuals.

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#106

Post by Afton »

michaelrpeskin wrote: post #58
donatj wrote: post #10

I work in EdTech, I have for a very long time now, and the problem I have seen is no one in education is willing to ACTUALLY let kids learn at their own level. The promise of EdTech was that kids could learn where they are. A kid who's behind can actually continue to learn rather than being left behind. A kid who's ahead can be nurtured. We had this. It worked well, in my opinion at least, and the number of complaint…

That's "equity" for you. We can't be unfair and give someone something that makes them better. It's easier to keep the top kids down than it is to lift the bottom kids up.

To be fair, it is less about "keeping top kids down" and more about "let's use our very scarce resources helping the bottom kids". Put that way it seems less malicious, and more like probably the right thing to do over all, while still being extremely frustrating if you are, or are the parent of, a 'top kid'. I know that in Seattle, I've been very frustrated with all the talk and promise of our school to provide enrichment to kids like mine who are able to learn quickly and are ready for more advanced learning opportunities, only to discover that it is haphazard, often in name only, and there isn't time or interest in providing more.

But it's not because of some drive for 'equity'. I've talked with teachers (as friends, not in a school setting). They're doing what they can with the resources they have.

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#107

Post by bbor »

I find it telling that “EdTech” is naturally assumed to be “classroom tools”. Talk about a lack of vision. The fine people at OMSCS are pioneering a fantastic new future for higher education, and it goes way beyond flash card systems and pop quiz tools.

Education is in trouble in America, but that doesn’t mean a) the concept of technology has failed, or b) it’s in trouble everywhere. The edtech revolution can’t fail, it already happened for many hundreds of millions worldwide with the advent of Wikipedia, YouTube, and Kahn Academy.

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#108

Post by quacksilver »

jspiral wrote: post #75
tombert wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bit tangential but related. I dropped out of college in 2012 and was one of the very lucky few who managed to find software engineering work almost immediately [1]. I had a bit of a complex about not having a degree, and a few times I tried going back only to drop out again because I would get bored; by the time I had gone back, I already knew enough stuff to be qualified as an engineer, and as such I didn't feel l…

WGU was a customer when I was at Learning Objects, they always impressed me visionary and outcome oriented. glad to hear a positive anecdote more than 10 years later.

I'm sad WGU is only for US citizens. I hear lots of good things about it but can't join in.

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#109

Post by tightbookkeeper »

Electronic learning materials tend to be consumer oriented. Instead of reading a book you’re going to click through an interactive story book, etc.

But custom software and is very expensive, and doesn’t scale. Thousands of work hours to make 1 consumable hour. It’s like maintaining an MMO and adding new quests every week, but without the talented devs or interesting source material.

The real leverage offered by technology is creative tools that enable experiences which are impractical, like simulations, etc.

But it’s probably a tougher sell to administrations:

- no telemetry (surveillance)

- not an on rails experience you can drop a low performing kid in front of

Re: The EdTech Revolution Has Failed

#110

Post by AdamN »

michaelrpeskin wrote: post #58
donatj wrote: post #10

I work in EdTech, I have for a very long time now, and the problem I have seen is no one in education is willing to ACTUALLY let kids learn at their own level. The promise of EdTech was that kids could learn where they are. A kid who's behind can actually continue to learn rather than being left behind. A kid who's ahead can be nurtured. We had this. It worked well, in my opinion at least, and the number of complaint…

That's "equity" for you. We can't be unfair and give someone something that makes them better. It's easier to keep the top kids down than it is to lift the bottom kids up.

That's not necessarily the reason. OP probably was letting faster kids jump ahead but that doesn't really do anything helpful for a class that's going through a topic together step by step.

Better would have been to let the faster person learn something else tangentially related to the course so that they stay engaged but they don't disengage because they're simply ahead of the rest of the class on the next topic - which is just frustrating for everybody.

Alternatives exist for self-directed study and the tutorial system but that's presumably not what they're building for.

Post reply on HN