Live data from Hacker News

$30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

yahoo.com

181–190 of 257 posts

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What would be better policy, in your opinion?

Having taught in schools for years? Treat companies that make addictive products the same way we treat drugs, alcohol and tobacco. Kids want them, particularly teenagers. We aren't perfect at stopping their access. But we can make a best attempt. It would be hard, and it would be 'anti-capitalism', but, I think we have done real long term damage to a generation, and I think in 20 years, like Tobacco, it I'll turn out…

> It would be hard, and it would be 'anti-capitalism'

These things are opposites - the former is a downside, the latter an upside.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#182
post #171

It being the first time a generation scored worse surprises me because it has been pretty obvious in the UK at least that the syllabus for children has been systematically and progressively dumbed down for at least the last 30 years. One concrete example I remember is in sixth form in the UK when I was there, in order to address poor example results in maths, they replaced Core Maths 1-6 with Pure Maths 1-6, the 6 mo…

1. Parents whine and bitch every time their precious little baby is expected to do any actual work.

2. Governments dumb down education programs. Some do it to massage the statistics and make education look good, others do it because they honestly think that's how you help teachers give more attention to low-performing students.

The effect is the widening "education gap" - the difference between kids whose parents sign them up for extracurricular activities, and the ipad kids.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#183
The issue isn't the laptops, but the proprietary software and the fact that teachers don't know how to use even a desktop on average, so they're even less capable of teaching it.

IF you teach how to use a FLOSS desktop, you're providing what's actually needed in the modern world; if you do Big Tech a favor by using their services in schools, you get a collapse in cognitive ability, which is exactly what happened. People just need to understand this and actually have the will to understand it.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>whiny parents who rage when their children are told they can't be playing video games in class you have stats on that? It seems like an outlier. >teachers who are using computer programs to teach the kids instead of actually teaching. before laptops there were bad teachers who used books to teach the kids instead of actually teaching - as in: "read chapter 7, there will be a test!" if after laptops there is a worse…

> you have stats on that? It seems like an outlier No stats, but it’s extremely real. I know lots of teachers. Parents who flip shit if their kids can’t answer their texts while in class are common. Parents who call their kids in class just to chat are less common, but not as one-in-a-million as you’d think. The attitude you (I’m assuming) and I were raised with, when it comes to school, is less universal than you pe…

OK so in fact parents who want their kids to be able to communicate with them as needed, not parents who want their kids to be able to play video games when so desiring?

Of course the ability to do the first gives the ability to do the second, but I think we can agree that they don't as a general rule want their kids to play video games. Again, outliers always exist.

Now as to why parents want their kids to answer when texted that can vary, maybe a lot of reasons are stupid but I can easily construct familial situations where the kid not being able to answer a text is a major disaster and probably parents in that situation flip shit because stuff is way more difficult for them than it is for other people. Probably those parents should have notified the school though, and the school should allow exceptions, but lots of schools are not, in my experience, run by people able to see the need for exceptions.

So I sort of expect that flipping shit happens the more stress there is, some of that can be passive aggressive shit flipping to relieve stress from other places but I would expect, as it matches to my experience in the world, that when shit flipping over trivial stupid stuff happens it is probably because the relatively trivial situation that is being flipped over connects closely to some problematic situation, and thus the trivial situation for most people who flip shit over it is not as trivial as it might be for the general population.

In short I would expect that the tendency to flip shit over the kid not being able to answer calls or texts in class would be proportionate to how absolutely necessary it is for particular family to have the kid answer calls or texts.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#185
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went to school in a poor country, and live in the US. The education budget was very low when / where I grew up, and it is pretty hefty where my kids go to school. I occasionally visit their school and volunteer to help. That has given me a good frame for comparison. The quality of education my kids are getting is pure trash compared to what I receieved. The problem is not the budget. It is the lack of real teachers…

> The problem is not the budget. It is the lack of real teachers, as well as a perpetually experimental curriculum. Taking this at face value: how are you teasing apart "lack of real teachers" from the budget? You don't think you'd get real teachers if there was a higher budget to pay them well? > The quality of education my kids are getting is pure trash compared to what I received. How are you doing this comparison…

You say that in USA there are no good teachers because any that are good will find better-paying professions?

This sounds plausible. Like the previous poster, I have grown in an Eastern European country where everybody was extremely poor by today's standards. Education was not perfect and there were many mediocre teachers and even bad teachers.

However, there were also a great number of very good teachers, so there were good chances that you would happen to have at least a few good teachers. There were also many opportunities for the best students to learn beyond the normal curriculum, either by self-study in good free libraries or by attending special extra-curricular classes held by the best teachers for various sciences.

I have a lot of friends who have migrated to USA many decades ago. All of them complain about how bad is the education that their children are receiving, in comparison with what we had when we were young, which matches what the previous poster was saying.

While in the schools that I attended as a young child the teachers would have been considered very poor in comparison with any US teacher of today, in comparison with most other professions available at that time they had decent salaries, so indeed there were not many non-illegal alternatives that would have been a better career choice.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#186
post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I went to school in a poor country, and live in the US. The education budget was very low when / where I grew up, and it is pretty hefty where my kids go to school. I occasionally visit their school and volunteer to help. That has given me a good frame for comparison. The quality of education my kids are getting is pure trash compared to what I receieved. The problem is not the budget. It is the lack of real teachers…

> The problem is not the budget. It is the lack of real teachers, as well as a perpetually experimental curriculum. Taking this at face value: how are you teasing apart "lack of real teachers" from the budget? You don't think you'd get real teachers if there was a higher budget to pay them well? > The quality of education my kids are getting is pure trash compared to what I received. How are you doing this comparison…

>You don't think you'd get real teachers if there was a higher budget to pay them well?

No, this has been proven many times that money is not a leading factor: Just one : https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED418160

The only clear indication of student performance is parent participation and involvement.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno, maybe it differs by country/location but my perception is that school was never capable to educate beyond some basic mediocrity level. Mostly it's an institution imposed by the state to process the children while parents are working. And the way to actually teach your kids something never really changed since the times of the elite few versus the mass of peasants: private tutoring. Now it's true that with ba…

We could pay teachers even half of the median salary for HN users, and then see if outcomes improve?

Nope, it's been tried before and it had 0 affect on student outcomes. I'm not saying that teachers don't "deserve" more, but it is not going to help students one bit.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#188

I guess my buddies using laptops in electrical engineering 10 years ago also got dumber? Ought to have done programming and CAD with pen and paper. I wish I had a laptop earlier - or even better, a tablet with a good pen and attachable keyboard. I’m struggling to think of a disadvantage vs dead tree [note]books. Doodle right on the pdf textbook, dump things to remember into some flashcards app, have notes as searchab…

Did you read the article?

I think he might have gotten too distracted.

Yeah, in an academic setting, in higher education, it might make sense like he mentioned. Still a personal preference. for me a laptop will never beat taking notes by hand on paper.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I dunno, maybe it differs by country/location but my perception is that school was never capable to educate beyond some basic mediocrity level. Mostly it's an institution imposed by the state to process the children while parents are working. And the way to actually teach your kids something never really changed since the times of the elite few versus the mass of peasants: private tutoring. Now it's true that with ba…

Schools can educate well beyond that level, provided they are resourced. Bloom’s 2 sigma problem comes to mind (1). Education also ends up suffering because its seen as a support role, teachers are not valued, and “He who can, does; he who cannot, teaches". Education is also political today. Science based education is an outright target. Increasing government spending to improve outcomes is also a contested issue, an…

This is true, but only in the way that no manager, private or government will ever fix. What happened to give good teachers in the 1980s (who kept working afterwards) is ... a large economic crash.

Which created a relatively large supply of people from capable, respected positions, in the hard/positivist sciences who suddenly lost their job. They always had the ability to displace teachers, but never wanted to. Then, suddenly, they had a strong incentive.

Managers, or government committees, to point out what they mostly were, were utterly baffled at this happening. They had spent decades making the demands to become a teacher easier, because they were in the situation we have now: they couldn't find people willing to work for the wage, for the (lack of) respect/status. They didn't change the wage, because status: they will never accept that teachers have a status above theirs. But suddenly, that didn't stop a lot of capable people from becoming teachers.

So this cohort of fired people blew through the requirements, fixed the shortage and even displaced quite a bit of teachers. Some never left. Some are still there. They were also used to getting respect in their jobs, and so they demanded that from government, from kids and parents (with the good ... and the bad that that brought, for example giving teachers the right to exclude troublemakers from education). They built a power base and lifted education, including increasing the demands on new teachers.

This in turn resulted in an enormous cohort of relatively well-educated people coming out of schools.

But the economy came back. A lot of these teachers left and of course the unions and government changed the rules so they themselves would be secure against a repeat of this. Displacing teachers, should anybody again suddenly want to, is a lot harder now (ironically unions thought the government would stand by them, but now the government is in constant saving mode, so they want to replace existing teachers by the cheapest labor they can find and so they're killing off those rules).

But the economy came back. To have capable teachers, schools would now have to outbid the private sector again. Which means government committees would have to vote their own status, their own pay, down. The way FANG managers have been forced to do: they'd have to accept that at least some of the people under them have more status, and more money, than they do. Needless to say, governments utterly refused this, because when such trivialities as the future of society conflict with their own money, their own status, the vote always goes the same way ... and here we are.

It's again not that well-educated people have disappeared, in fact there's more than ever before, it's that they, like in the 60s and 70s, will not accept the deal the government is offering, and the government doesn't want to offer even that deal.

But this all started happening 30 years ago and really pushed through 15 or so years ago. A whole generation has been educated already by teachers that just don't measure up to the teachers that came before. This new generation ... doesn't measure up and of course finds this situation very unfair, they never had a chance, and it really isn't their fault. Government explicitly chose to create this situation. Or to put it very bluntly: there are suddenly a great deal of young MAGAs, growing every year. The same goes for Europe too, especially since most countries have now decided they'll just outright stop education in a bunch of fields, killing off and defunding university department after department (so much cheaper to have Turkey, or China, or ... educate doctors and engineers), which then of course meant that most or all people in high positions are not locals, which means the path to high status that education used to be is a lot narrower now.

... and then Trump did the same in America. And yes, where Europe did it slowly, limiting damage, Trump decided to take a chainsaw (or what he actually used, as it turns out: a really bad LLM) to the US equivalent.

It always come back to the same argument: being inclusive, respectful, having authority, friendly, ... all of this matters. But having teachers capable in the hard sciences, is table stakes, and that is expensive. If you have a disrespectful teacher that has an excellent grasp of the subject, kids get educated. If you have a teacher that is inclusive, respectful, has authority, the friendliest person you've ever met, but limited grasp of the subject, kids don't get an education. NOT the other way around. You HAVE to start with teachers with excellent education and today that means you pay for it. But government refuses.

And yes, that's not much of a problem for the wealthy, who are educated and just educate their own kids, if need be, they do it themselves. Or they get tutors that they pay well. The rich are not the problem here. You will not fix this situation by sabotaging the rich's efforts to educate their kids. It's that government has decided they can spend just a little bit more money now if they close off the path that education provides. And the cohort of people that already got educated so much worse than people 10 years older ... they want revenge and so this is exactly what they want government to do.

Any study on education will always say that educating someone is comparable to a process of diffusion. The kids top out at the level of their teachers, no matter the process. Humans learn 99.99999% or more through imitation, so the subject grasp of the teacher is effectively the limit for the kids. At that level learning slows to a crawl at best. Imitation is the cheap, fast way humans learn (for obvious reasons if you've done even a little bit of machine learning. Think of how much information a teacher giving you the answer to a problem gives, and then about how much information an experiment gives)

It is of course true that students can exceed the teachers. But that is a very slow, very expensive process that takes years to learn even relatively simple things. And that requires providing resources directly to the students.

Resources matter ... but not laptops. I mean, by all means give teachers the resources they require. But first you must enforce a quality level in the teachers. That's table stakes and nothing will help until that's in place.

Re: $30B for laptops yielded a generation less cognitively capable than parents

#190
post #183

The issue isn't the laptops, but the proprietary software and the fact that teachers don't know how to use even a desktop on average, so they're even less capable of teaching it. IF you teach how to use a FLOSS desktop, you're providing what's actually needed in the modern world; if you do Big Tech a favor by using their services in schools, you get a collapse in cognitive ability, which is exactly what happened. Peo…

If not for my job, I would never have a need to type a single line in a Linux terminal. I don't know what does that have to do with modern world.
Post reply on HN