511–520 of 629 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am conflicted on this. One part of me think that they deserve a lot more compensation. But I am not really sure if that should be in the form of a salary rise.
Why not?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It’s okay to pat yourself on the back sometimes, but you have 0 idea about me/my kid, if she’s neurotypical or neurodivergent. So I suggest to keep unasked parental advices or expectations how other kids should behave to yourself.
> So I suggest to keep unasked parental advices or expectations how other kids should behave to yourself. Forget it. Not gonna happen, on a story about kid's development, in a thread about lack of impulse control. Sure, there could be physiological reasons for a given child to have a lack of impulse control, but in practice most of a child's characteristics are going to be from the environment.
It’s hard to parse the tone in comments like this, and I’m sorry if am off the mark here, but a little more compassion and consideration makes life and everyone better.
> Pupils from first through seventh grade, aged 6 to 13, should as a general rule not be using AI, while those in lower secondary school, aged 14 to 16, can cautiously adopt tools under teachers' supervision, the government said. Sounds right to me. Kids under 13 need to learn to read, write and comprehend text. Generative AI is not going to help them with those skills. They can play with AI at home, and after 13 the…
> Generative AI is not going to help them with those skills. I think it's more complex than this. AI is both the best technology ever invented for avoiding learning, and the best technology ever invented for learning. The cat is out of the bag. If teachers are asking for take-home essay assignments in 2026 then students are going to use AI and learn nothing. "AI detectors" are nowhere near reliable enough to be fair;…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The counterargument is that kids will live in a world different from our own. For example, in many countries children lost the ability to write cursive; that used to be a critical skill comparable to literacy itself. But in our current society, that's no longer the case and you can be very successful without it, but there are other skills, such as using technology, that became critical. Any definitive claim to know w…
But how do you know that letting kids use AI at a way earlier age is the right way to equip them for the world that they would live in? You don't even know what that world will be like, so you can't even draw the conclusion that teaching them AI today will create career success in the future. And then there's the other solid supporting arguments: - Humans today were able to comprehend and use AI as soon as ChatGPT be…
What you can do though, is to offer them broad exposure to things that are interesting to them and their generation; my eastern block clone of the 8bit/48KB Spectrum computer didn't really help me excel at math, reading or history, nor was it to be the future of technology, but it did change my life significantly by letting me understand and relate to people that I couldn't otherwise have business dealings decades later.
It seems imprudent to cut children off from futuristic technology just because of a moral panic that it causes brain rot. Unless we know it's soma, a drug so powerful that it subdues volition and curtails intellectual development; we don't.
> Pupils from first through seventh grade, aged 6 to 13, should as a general rule not be using AI, while those in lower secondary school, aged 14 to 16, can cautiously adopt tools under teachers' supervision, the government said. Sounds right to me. Kids under 13 need to learn to read, write and comprehend text. Generative AI is not going to help them with those skills. They can play with AI at home, and after 13 the…
> Generative AI is not going to help them with those skills. I think it's more complex than this. AI is both the best technology ever invented for avoiding learning, and the best technology ever invented for learning. The cat is out of the bag. If teachers are asking for take-home essay assignments in 2026 then students are going to use AI and learn nothing. "AI detectors" are nowhere near reliable enough to be fair;…
Every single household I've seen benevolent use of phones/tablets/tv/computer/consoles (quite often all of it), kids were unruly, had shitty grades, living empty lives without good role models and very little passions or hobbies, and overall were more depressed than happy.
I do get why - its supremely easier to just throw tech at them and let them drown in endless cheap dopamine content, triple that for already-addicted parents. The whole principle of active screen itself is so overpowering and addictive compared to good old physical toys, drawing, paint, reading etc.
As a parent of young kids, its much harder to come up, continuously, with good motivating program out there, or even indoors, ie climbing. But - I didn't get kids to have easiest possible life, coursing through our short lives deep in comfort zone is a failure IMHO, thats not life well lived, that's life avoided. I am not kind to such parents - its the biggest achievement, or failure, in one's life, biggest challenges bring biggest rewards. Rather few people put in corresponding effort continuously, compared to careers, relaxing and other aspects of adult lives.
And then folks wonder why so many old people are sour, seeing in more life-successful others all the stuff one could/should have done if not so lazy is deeply depressing, usually amounts to biggest life regrets.
> Pupils from first through seventh grade, aged 6 to 13, should as a general rule not be using AI, while those in lower secondary school, aged 14 to 16, can cautiously adopt tools under teachers' supervision, the government said. Sounds right to me. Kids under 13 need to learn to read, write and comprehend text. Generative AI is not going to help them with those skills. They can play with AI at home, and after 13 the…
> Generative AI is not going to help them with those skills. I think it's more complex than this. AI is both the best technology ever invented for avoiding learning, and the best technology ever invented for learning. The cat is out of the bag. If teachers are asking for take-home essay assignments in 2026 then students are going to use AI and learn nothing. "AI detectors" are nowhere near reliable enough to be fair;…
Typically there's not a whole lot of homework prior to Grade 7 anyways.
Homework levels between elementary school and start of junior might look something like this:
Division I / early elementary - no formal assignments should be made, though 5–10 minutes of systematic study or reading was recommended.
Division II / upper elementary - formal homework could be assigned at the teacher’s discretion, but generally should be reading or study-type work and not exceed about 20 minutes.
Starting from junior high - students are expected to study one-half to one hour per school night.Earlier quoted context omitted.
> without increasing educator workload substantially Isn't this a good thing, employing more educators, building more schools? Any sane society will always invest more into its future well being and incentivize investments into education.
Not sure what country you live in, but I don't think that the US falls under your definition of a "sane society"
Teachers should be paid and respected as much as doctors are, all levels, all age. But they should be skilled up too, every single one of them needs to be very good ad child psychology, no exception there even effin' gym teacher. If would arrange itself easily if they would be having doctor's salaries. They should be themselves role models, its #2 after parents usually.
US is not a modern country also in this aspect, its everybody for themselves, fuck the poor they didn't try hard enough and thats it. Wealth-based class society at best. Somebody has to clean pools and houses of rich folks anyway, it ain't gonna be their work colleagues.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not?
Because those who are attracted by the high pay might not be the best ones to do the job.
We don't need people stressing and struggling financially for the privilege of teaching our youth. That leaves those without a better option or have a working spouse.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> And now I need to either disable everything or figure out how to turn that off for her. Why? I tell me 6yo "That's for adults only, children are not allowed to use it" and not have to worry. Sure, he'll push boundaries here and there, but with some things he knows "No means no" and doesn't push those boundaries. I have literally tested this: left a cookie on the table (that he wants) and told him "You can eat that…
You tested it, i doubt you authored it. A paternal twin can have one with good impulse control and another who's more instinctual. Even in the same family and upbringing.
Everybody can be taught some degree of behavior even if it may require different amount / type of effort, I refuse to believe it ain't true apart from most extreme cases.