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

Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

undark.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 454 posts

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#261

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

ajsnigrutin wrote: post #221
fasterik wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I realized using tech in education (pre university) was a mistake. I think we should use tech in education, but in a targeted way. It's important that children gain basic technical literacy, like how to touch type and use basic software. I suspect there is a gap in the technical literacy of lower income students, whose parents are less likely to have a computer at home. The real problem is separating reading/writing…

> It's important that children gain basic technical literacy, like how to touch type and use basic software. I suspect there is a gap in the technical literacy of lower income students, whose parents are less likely to have a computer at home. Some of us "a bit older" seem to have gone through a golden era of tech, where we actually learned that tech en-masse. In a class of maybe 30 students, around 20, 25 of them we…

Boomers are split between a demographic that is very computer literate, having worked in/around science and tech for decades, and a demo that isn't remotely literate and may not even be online.

The latter is a fairly small demo though - supposedly around a third.

The split is more by education than by age.

Kids can use computers - phones - as app appliances, but they don't understand computers.

Peak literacy is young Gen X and older millennials.

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#262

Post by fasterik »

kpw94 wrote: post #255
fasterik wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I realized using tech in education (pre university) was a mistake. I think we should use tech in education, but in a targeted way. It's important that children gain basic technical literacy, like how to touch type and use basic software. I suspect there is a gap in the technical literacy of lower income students, whose parents are less likely to have a computer at home. The real problem is separating reading/writing…

That's not using tech that you're describing here. You're talking about literally learning some basic computer skills (such as word processor, excel, reading email, some basic website building, use printer, and some amount of programming) For those, obviously you need a computer and completely agree that those are important skills to learn... But you maybe need to spend 1h/week during last 2 years of middle school on…

Would it be a mistake to use Desmos in a math classroom, or 3Blue1Brown style animations, to build up visual intuition? Should we not teach basic numerical and statistical methods in Python? Should kids be forced to use physical copies of newspapers and journal articles instead of learning how to look things up in a database?

I'm all for going back to analog where it makes sense, but it seems wrongheaded to completely remove things that are relevant skills for most 21st century careers.

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#263

Post by datsci_est_2015 »

xboxnolifes wrote: post #253
datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You typed out this message by hitting individual keys as your eyes searched for them? Isn’t that mentally exhausting?

You dont need to learn to touch type to avoid searching out each key individually. You just need experience. I was taught touch typing as a kid. None of it took. I dont use the home row. I developed into the gamer home row hand positioning for typing.

I guess this is technically correct in the same way that stenographers and highly-ergonomic alternative-layout keyboard users also don’t “touch type” according to a strict definition.

If you’re capable of typing quick enough to publicly take meeting notes, then it’s fine. But if you can’t, I could see it being professionally embarrassing in the same way that not understanding basic arithmetic could be professionally embarrassing.

That’s the kind of (in)capability we’re talking about when it comes to Gen Z. Like not knowing ctrl-c ctrl-v.

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#264

Post by datsci_est_2015 »

alecbz wrote: post #254
datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You typed out this message by hitting individual keys as your eyes searched for them? Isn’t that mentally exhausting?

> Although [touch typing] refers to typing without using the sense of sight to find the keys ... the term is often used to refer to a specific form of touch typing that involves placing the eight fingers in a horizontal row along the middle of the keyboard (the home row) and having them reach for specific other keys. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Touch_typing I think they're referring to the latter.

With such a strict definition the OP’s comment becomes basically meaningless. They could be referring to using index fingers only. They could be using an alternative keyboard layout. They could mostly be using left-hand only. Pretty much any WPM between 1 and 200 seems possible with the statement: “I don’t keep my fingers on home row in between key presses.”

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#265

Post by graemep »

Gigachad wrote: post #31
brobdingnagians wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Especially since kids these days aren't even very good at using computers: http://www.coding2learn.org/blog/2013/07/29/kids-cant-use-co... It seems to me that if someone can read and think critically-- they can RTFM and get much better much quicker at computers and AI than people who spent all their time tapping an ipad to watch the next video.

I'd think really the only AI skill you need is the ability to think independently and be able to verify the results you are getting or spot when something is wrong in the response. It would take a few sessions at most to take someone from 10 years ago and get them fully up to speed with AI tools since they have zero learning curve.

You also need to understand the limits of AI and that it has limits that a human that gives you usually correct and authoritative answers does not have.

I think it comes easily to the sort of people who comment here. Moat people have a very vague understanding of computers in general.

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#266

Post by xboxnolifes »

datsci_est_2015 wrote: post #263
xboxnolifes wrote: post #253

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You dont need to learn to touch type to avoid searching out each key individually. You just need experience. I was taught touch typing as a kid. None of it took. I dont use the home row. I developed into the gamer home row hand positioning for typing.

I guess this is technically correct in the same way that stenographers and highly-ergonomic alternative-layout keyboard users also don’t “touch type” according to a strict definition. If you’re capable of typing quick enough to publicly take meeting notes, then it’s fine. But if you can’t, I could see it being professionally embarrassing in the same way that not understanding basic arithmetic could be professionally…

My point is that there's almost nothing to teach about it. You just need to use a keyboard enough to build experience.

What could you possibly teach about touch typing besides just telling people to do typing tests or write papers over and over again?

People aren't bad typers because they weren't taught. They're bad typer because they dont type.

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#267

Post by arjie »

muskyFelon wrote: post #140
TaupeRanger wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It tells us nothing. People act like this is some big hypocrisy or revelation. First of all, Jobs DID allow his children to use iPads, but it was limited. People take a single quote from the Isaacson biography out of context, assuming that he never let his children have access to iPads at all, forever. Other interviews he gave talked about limiting access - like ALL families should do. Jobs was literally just parenti…

Its a luxury that affluent people have to limit these things. When you're at your limit after a long day of work and still have stuff to do at home the kid gets the phone, iPad, or whatever while parents do the needed to run the household. Wonder why obesity is such a problem for poorer families. Convenience. Yes, tech companies are liable for pushing this technology that they know to be addictive. There is no apolog…

> Wonder why obesity is such a problem for poorer families. Convenience.

Assuming this were to be the case, one would need to explain why this doesn't happen to men.

> Among men, the prevalence of obesity was lower in both the lowest (31.5%) and highest (32.6%) income groups compared with the middle-income group (38.5%).

And among women, one would need to explain why it doesn't happen to Black women.

> Among non-Hispanic black women, there was no difference in obesity prevalence among the income groups.

It also needs to explain why no statistically significant result happens for Asian women

> Among women, prevalence was lower in the highest income group (29.7%) than in the middle (42.9%) and lowest (45.2%) income groups. This pattern was observed among non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic Asian, and Hispanic women, but it was only significant for white women.

Without looking deeper into the issue, the natural thing the income vs. obesity thing overall shows is a population blend issue (Simpson's paradox). It gets too tortured otherwise: yeah, Black women always have inconvenience, Asian women mostly don't have more convenient lives as they become richer, and White women get massively more convenient lives as they get wealthier. Men until 2008 got less convenient lives as they got wealthier and then their lives got neither more convenient nor less convenient but stayed the same.

That's pretty rough number of epicycles to stick into this convenience angle.

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/66/wr/mm6650a1.htm

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/products/databriefs/db50.htm

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#268

Post by lysace »

ffsoftboiled wrote: post #258

Impossible for a Vocational Tech teacher in the networking field. How can I teach computers without computers?

(Maybe use some of those skills to figure out a way to read more than the headline.)

I recommend reading at least the closing line:

This means introducing digital technology at later ages after basic reading and other skills have been achieved.

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#269

Post by kqr »

ninalanyon wrote: post #231
fasterik wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I realized using tech in education (pre university) was a mistake. I think we should use tech in education, but in a targeted way. It's important that children gain basic technical literacy, like how to touch type and use basic software. I suspect there is a gap in the technical literacy of lower income students, whose parents are less likely to have a computer at home. The real problem is separating reading/writing…

> how to touch type What for? I've been writing computer programs and documentation since 1969 and I can't touch type. I've never felt enough pressure to do it. I can still type faster than I can think. When I'm writing most of my time is spent thinking not tapping the keys.

Fast typing is not about throughput, it's about latency. If I only needed to type fast enough to produce the 125-something lines of code I get into production per week, I would be able to work at a word a minute. Alas, that's not how that works.

https://entropicthoughts.com/typing-fast-is-about-latency-no...

Re: Sweden goes back to basics, swapping screens for books in the classroom

#270

Post by TheOtherHobbes »

Gigachad wrote: post #5
gritspants wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see the advantage of learning 'AI workflows'. I am in the US and there seems to be a FOMO plague infecting our school system when it comes to technology. In practice it seems more destructive to the child.

I keep hearing this at work but so far no one has explained what “learning ai” actually means. It seems to just be nonsense like those people selling prompt recipes or claiming to be prompt engineers. No one needs training in prompting AI. I could understand if they meant a deeper layer of integrating tech with systems but all they ever mean is typing things in to a text box.

You absolutely need prompting skills to use AI usefully. You need to know how to eliminate sycophancy, how to ask for and check primary sources, and how to use follow-up questions.

I've been using AI for some legal issues, and it's been incredibly good at searching for case law and summarising the key implications of various statutes - much more efficient than web search, with direct links to the primary sources it finds.

I'm still the one gaming out "What if...?" and "Does that mean..?" scenarios and making sure the answers are grounded in the relevant statutes, and aren't mistakes or hallucinations.

It's not so much a prompting problem as a critical thinking and verbal reasoning problem.

Post reply on HN