As a high school theatre arts teacher for 42 years, I lament the thought of the beauty and wonderment of the arts and the humanities being lost by the rush to change education by those who are technology millionaires. They may not have the knowledge or understanding of what would be missing in the lives of young students.
38
In attempting to reform any aspect of pubic education, the most pressing issue that Benioff, Zuckerberg, et al. must face if their proposals are to have any chance of gaining a fair hearing, let alone acceptance, is to somehow assure teachers, administrators, and union officials that by adopting these new curricula and the innovative methods for teaching them, they will not in any way be jeopardizing their job security, pensions, benefits, or future union membership.
Math and computer science indeed.
Math and computer science indeed.
9
Has any of these people ever run into an actual idea?
4
Public schools are supposed to be public. Public schools should not be controlled by billionaires that would never send their own children to be educated there.
Billionaires should start by changing policy so they pay a fair share of taxes into the pool like the rest of us.
Billionaires should start by changing policy so they pay a fair share of taxes into the pool like the rest of us.
36
It is interesting to read the quote by the "CEO" of the charter-school network that uses the software touted by Mark Zuckerberg describing these schools as looking "more like a Google or a Facebook than a school." She didn't say they look more like a college classroom. As a high school math teacher, one of my main objectives is to prepare students at my selective public career academy for college. Most of the reforms available for math may sound fun and exciting for the kids but do not prepare them for the rigor of a college math class or the standardized college-admission tests that are still part of the college process. The same CEO admits that graduates were having a tough time adapting to college. I believe these kind of dramatic changes, if they are shown to be effective, have to start at the college level and work their way down the educational chain. When the colleges my students aspire to attend change their ways of teaching, so will I.
12
How about putting that tech money to up teacher salaries and hire more teachers to drive down the teacher-student ratio? This seems to be a winning formula at rich private schools, who don't use computers until middle school. Computerized "self-teaching" is likely to be another boondoggle, calculated to commercially indoctrinate and advertise to students rather than inculcate critical thinking.
31
Try searching articles about schools where tech leaders send their own children. Many are schools such as Waldo that de-emphasize computer-mediated learning, or even go tech-free! Emphasis is on face to face interaction, hands on experiential learning, fostering imagination, artistry, and outdoor education.
35
Modules can play a part in "personalized learning" by providing an automated differentiation. But so far, the "personalized learning" tech I've seen is just a reconfigured textbook in a box.
How does working alone at computer teach collaboration? How does multiple choice, designed for efficiency not efficacy, develop critical thinking? How do these modules help our young people learn to build/defend an argument, orally? Education is not about every child for themselves - because that is not what humanity is about. Humanity is about rising together. Give me technology that lets me make that happen.
Make me something to engage students in learning and develop real skills. Make me 3D hologram projections showing how the systems of the human body interact. Make me simulations of what physically happens to the body when we scuba dive or enter space. Make me a 20-30 player urban design/development game. Make me something that lets me teach DIFFERENTLY than I can now - so I can really be a facilitator of discovery and not an in-person Google search.
This is not meant to be a critique - it's an appeal. Tech: you have the resources and connections. You want to innovate education? Listen to what educators say they need now, look at what we need from our future citizens and bridge that gap.
How does working alone at computer teach collaboration? How does multiple choice, designed for efficiency not efficacy, develop critical thinking? How do these modules help our young people learn to build/defend an argument, orally? Education is not about every child for themselves - because that is not what humanity is about. Humanity is about rising together. Give me technology that lets me make that happen.
Make me something to engage students in learning and develop real skills. Make me 3D hologram projections showing how the systems of the human body interact. Make me simulations of what physically happens to the body when we scuba dive or enter space. Make me a 20-30 player urban design/development game. Make me something that lets me teach DIFFERENTLY than I can now - so I can really be a facilitator of discovery and not an in-person Google search.
This is not meant to be a critique - it's an appeal. Tech: you have the resources and connections. You want to innovate education? Listen to what educators say they need now, look at what we need from our future citizens and bridge that gap.
27
This is so incredibly WRONG! Does the public school system need a transformation? Yes. Superintendents know it, principals know it, teachers know it, staff know it, parents know it and students know it. But but you don't just walk in and plop down some experiment on kids (especially the historically underserved) and not get stakeholders in the loop.
And shame on those superintendents and principals for agreeing to take the money in exchange for complete control over the education of the kids they're supposed to educate and serve. These folks coming into your schools with programs and technology are the furthest away from your students and their communities.
Any of you billionaires and millionaires out there who want to help (not take over) our public schools through major investments, come see me and we can talk about how to do it the right way--in true collaborative partnership. Technology Access Foundation (www.techaccess.org) is doing this right now in Washington State with innovative superintendents who understand it takes partnerships to make the changes they want. More school districts want that kind of support. Invest in TAF's capacity to get it done. Let's talk! [email protected]
And shame on those superintendents and principals for agreeing to take the money in exchange for complete control over the education of the kids they're supposed to educate and serve. These folks coming into your schools with programs and technology are the furthest away from your students and their communities.
Any of you billionaires and millionaires out there who want to help (not take over) our public schools through major investments, come see me and we can talk about how to do it the right way--in true collaborative partnership. Technology Access Foundation (www.techaccess.org) is doing this right now in Washington State with innovative superintendents who understand it takes partnerships to make the changes they want. More school districts want that kind of support. Invest in TAF's capacity to get it done. Let's talk! [email protected]
6
The difference between the old wealthy such as Carnegie, Rockefeller, Kennedy et al and the new technorich is that the former worked long and hard to build their wealth, while the latter largely became instant zillionaires on the back of an idea IPO. The old money certainly did not hesitate to throw its financial weight around. However, having worked their way up the food chain, they did not, unlike the technobrats, equate wisdom and morality with wealth.
22
Well, of course and individual who is clearly on the autism spectrum, like um, is it Doctor Zuckerberg? - would prefer kids "teach themselves" - but not all autistic kids find how to socialize through their computers! NORMAL children LIKE and NEED direct personal interactions with other human beings - they are called EDUCATORS.
Just because Mark succeeded despite his social learning disorder does not warrant changing the American school system to fit his autistic social perspective - does Zuckerberg money buy ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING?!?!
Just because Mark succeeded despite his social learning disorder does not warrant changing the American school system to fit his autistic social perspective - does Zuckerberg money buy ANYTHING AND EVERYTHING?!?!
16
we need an emoluments clause to reign in the motivations of self serving tech titans. The conflict of interest here is obvious.
2
We keep wanting to focus on bells and whistles, re-purposed video games, fancy new educational theories, political sideshows, etc., when the two most important factors in improving education are known and consistently ignored. Teachers need upgraded training ie. better professional development, and upgraded rewards ie. more money. Students need to be exposede to a learning environment at an earlier age, especially those students from underpriveleged backgrounds.
7
Mark Benioff is giving money to schools in the most wealthy part of SF. Why not donate to schools in the Tenderloin or Hunters Point? He's patting himself on the back but not looking at the areas of need from a realistic viewpoint. The tech industry has driven up rents and caused our homeless population to skyrocket. Why not contribute to that cause? Ed Lee and the tech CEO's seem to be missing the mark altogether.
7
If only they were actually trained educators.... And p.s. to Zuckerburg,what, your $100,000,000 fiasco in Newark wasn't enough for you?
11
A simple lesson for all schools:
A, B, C, D.
Anyone But Crazy DeVos.
A, B, C, D.
Anyone But Crazy DeVos.
7
Netflix's recent changes to its UI have been anything _ but_ confidence-inspiring; they've made it harder to find the good content and easier for Netflix to push mediocrity. Looks like Hastings has drunk his own kool-aid without realizing that eliminating the information required to make an informed choice isn't the way to help users get what they're paying for. Making math into an addictive video game probably won't serve students well either.
8
Think about these forward thinking tech moguls becoming part of crowdsourcing our next, great political party to replace the ones that are tired, worn, and sadly out of touch with innovation. #downthemiddle2020
3
Re Zuckerberg's teach thyself, many years ago I heard that "teachers should be the guide by the side rather than the sage on the stage!"
2
Because who knows more about education than a Silicon Valley billionaire?!?! He's no better for education than DeVos.
12
Teaching today is like playing wack a mole, trying to stop kids using their phones in class.
4
While I don't think that technology is a panacea or that technology executives have all the answers to improving education, I do think that experimentation is a good thing, and I laud those who have been willing to expend resources on trying different approaches in the classroom. Many efforts may fail, but I hope we can all learn from the experience, discarding the elements that were unsuccessful, and perhaps taking away a few nuggets that showed promise.
1
Why is it in our society a person's IQ is related to one's wealth?
These tech execs aren't any more intelligent or capable than most folks. They have had (most of them) the luck to have not been born in poverty and a fine education and the luck to have had ideas ahead of their time. THIS makes them qualified to determine the best way to teach our young???? Nope.
The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation tried to push common core into US schools via a database (inBloom) containing student data which would the have an App interface for companies to write applications for students. (much like the iPhone).
Parents were outraged about common core and possible privacy issues with the database. After $100 million spent, the project was scrapped.
Common Core and this database were arrogantly created without input from parents and teachers. This article is highlighting other tech execs arrogance in pushing their ideas and beliefs onto our education system so they can sell more technology.
It isn't as if the tech industry is a shining star in being anything than short term profit motivated companies. They skirt labor laws in hiring white men (see DOL lawsuits). They are recklessly moving ahead in skirting laws of safety and what constitutes an employee (see Uber). Instead of using wisdom and discussing societal impacts of driverless cars, they callously move ahead regardless of how many truckers and others are unemployed. And we trust them to look to the greater good of society???
These tech execs aren't any more intelligent or capable than most folks. They have had (most of them) the luck to have not been born in poverty and a fine education and the luck to have had ideas ahead of their time. THIS makes them qualified to determine the best way to teach our young???? Nope.
The Bill & Melinda Gates foundation tried to push common core into US schools via a database (inBloom) containing student data which would the have an App interface for companies to write applications for students. (much like the iPhone).
Parents were outraged about common core and possible privacy issues with the database. After $100 million spent, the project was scrapped.
Common Core and this database were arrogantly created without input from parents and teachers. This article is highlighting other tech execs arrogance in pushing their ideas and beliefs onto our education system so they can sell more technology.
It isn't as if the tech industry is a shining star in being anything than short term profit motivated companies. They skirt labor laws in hiring white men (see DOL lawsuits). They are recklessly moving ahead in skirting laws of safety and what constitutes an employee (see Uber). Instead of using wisdom and discussing societal impacts of driverless cars, they callously move ahead regardless of how many truckers and others are unemployed. And we trust them to look to the greater good of society???
11
I find this very stimulating, invigorating!! I would think that it needs to start at a very low level, even kindergarten. The basics have, HAVE to be the cornerstones of advancement. I can see basic levels of assignments that are done several times to increase understanding and speed. I can see where teachers start with instruction and advance on an individual basis to facilitating and mentoring. But teaching the fundamentals is paramount. Teaching by rout is good at very basic levels, but it must, must advance to challenging thought and problem solving. The end result is personal management and innovation thought process.
Way too many high school graduates do not know how to write, read or do basic math. They just floated along doing the minimum without any personal commitment. The real goal is to get them to grab onto personal commitment that pays huge dividends in not only getting a job, but in every aspect of their future.
In truth, I am at an age that I will be selling my business and I can see that donating to my local school might really have a much larger return than any charity.
Way too many high school graduates do not know how to write, read or do basic math. They just floated along doing the minimum without any personal commitment. The real goal is to get them to grab onto personal commitment that pays huge dividends in not only getting a job, but in every aspect of their future.
In truth, I am at an age that I will be selling my business and I can see that donating to my local school might really have a much larger return than any charity.
1
Thank your his story. I was a tutor in a middle school in SF supposedly benefited from Marc Benioff. That is false, Richard Carranza was correct in that students are used and as noted part of the typical start up records as failures. Also Salesforce.org had many issues in terms of its leadership at the time noted, it would be worth a whole story on that. Marc Benioff is not a bad guy but his efforts in education in SF schools has not resulted in any gains. Emmett Carlson, also is worthy of a more in depth study of SVCF use of donor directed funds largely outside of the silicon valley community it supposedly serves. The public schools in santa clara and san mateo counties, outiside of the high income neighborhoods do not serve the children. And the initiatives by Priscilla Chan and Mark Zuckerberg are self serving at best. SF area public schools for the most part are failing their students, and the private schools largely cherry pick students and then insist the technology is the key to success. It is not, good teachers will always be the best solution. Although CA has a real problem with teachers, in terms of keeping the best and well firing those that are not in fact teaching.
2
For the technically oriented, all education is technically oriented. Which means the very dangerous short-shrift to English and history and civics--subject indispensable to citizens in a democracy. The dangers should be evident in the nature of political discourse in recent years. No amount of STEM instruction can decide whether the Affordable Care Act is a good or a bad thing, whether a pre-emptive attack on North Korea makes sense or not, and so forth. All of the major issues which this country faces require a balancing of historical facts and cultural values which derive from the education in the humanities.
13
How is a facebook program in 100 schools remaking education nationwide on a "vast scale"? This is ridiculous hyperbole. There have always been innovations in education, many of them ultimately failures but some that have become standard practice. The contributions of silicone valley to that ongoing process ought to be welcomed. If silicone valley is remaking education on a vast scale it is through the products they produce, the same way they have remade the workplace "on a vast scale."
4
I wouldn't trust the Silicon Billionaires with anything. Just imagine what 660 million dollars could to do to promote education across the board. Facebook, Instagram, Google, Kik, and others have done more harm than good. Instead they've nurtured an environment that has incubated the American public's worse inclinations, given rise to Fake News, Lazy Journalism, and fostering another obstacle for parents who are trying to raise children.
Improving education for every student will ultimately put a more qualified and devised group of potential employee's into the US and World Economy.
Improving education for every student will ultimately put a more qualified and devised group of potential employee's into the US and World Economy.
8
As a public school student myself, the greatest danger I see here is a standardization of ideas. If students teach themselves on an artificial platform, their thought process will naturally reflect the limitations of that platform. For example, drawing on a computer does not allow you to damage art with water teaches students that such art does not exist. As a result, the assumptions of the algorithm will always remain unexamined.
This is an especially bad thing both because we have so many pressing problems right now and because the algorithms Silicon Valley turns out reflect Silicon Valley's biases. For all its focus on enlightenment, the valley is still incredibly prejudiced and prone (like any industry) to prioritizing its own profit.
We need more diverse thinkers, not fewer. You'd think Silicon Valley would understand that.
This is an especially bad thing both because we have so many pressing problems right now and because the algorithms Silicon Valley turns out reflect Silicon Valley's biases. For all its focus on enlightenment, the valley is still incredibly prejudiced and prone (like any industry) to prioritizing its own profit.
We need more diverse thinkers, not fewer. You'd think Silicon Valley would understand that.
14
This is nothing more than a pitch for dehumanized education. The enthusiasts for this should read a bit about Professor harlow's experiments with monkys at the University of Wisconsin several years ago. It just amazes me how ideas like this seem to pop up like mushroom on a forest floor year after year - shot down with good research time after time and yet there they are. Teaching and learning are essentially a human process, a human interaction. If the world want a humane future then it must support humane teaching and learning. There are no short cuts.
8
Reading through the comments it seems there's a lot of aversion to this sort of tech philanthropy, and yes it's certainly problematic without regulatory oversight. But isn't that the point a lot of commenters seem to be missing? Yes of course the most important thing to a child's education and development is human interaction and resilience, a skill set that can't be learnt by sitting in front a screen, but we do have to be realistic that we live in a world increasingly ruled by and reliant on technology and we need to give kids the tools to respond to this. We would also be foolish not to explore the possibilities it offers for education. So again, is not the main issue the lack of regulation??
4
Can a computer be passionate about a subject or transmit that passion to a student?
11
I've been an adult ed teacher for the past twelve years. Before that, I had a career in manufacturing. In industry, about every five years or so I would go to a seminar where someone would get on the podium and say 'you people are so so stupid. This is what you should be doing' and they would then introduce the lastest flavor du jour - TQM, Six Sigma, etc.
In adult education about every other year - notice the frequency difference - someone gets on the podium and says 'you people are so stupid. Here's what you should be doing / teaching' and they would then introduce some new concept like contextualized learning or 'managed enrollment' or what have you. None of these people have any real classroom experience anymore than the gurus spouting industry bromides ever ran a shop or met a payroll.
Which begs the question: Why are we so stupid? Why do we keep drinking the kool-aid?
In adult education about every other year - notice the frequency difference - someone gets on the podium and says 'you people are so stupid. Here's what you should be doing / teaching' and they would then introduce some new concept like contextualized learning or 'managed enrollment' or what have you. None of these people have any real classroom experience anymore than the gurus spouting industry bromides ever ran a shop or met a payroll.
Which begs the question: Why are we so stupid? Why do we keep drinking the kool-aid?
13
This article took what could have been a really great story on the future of education and instead politicized the topic from a obnoxiously liberal perspective. Read up on the history of public education a bit before writing this kind of hit piece. And write more news, less opinion.
I read the title, and for a fleeting moment thought, "Betsy Devos"?
3
America follows Adam Smith into the toilet. We're raising a generation of children who don't read, have no critical thinking ability other than comparing prices, and cannot speak grammatically correct English, let alone a second language.
8
As a former educator, I have no problem with technology assisting with education at a gradual pace. However, I fear with these "adoptions" it will could further an agenda which separates based on class, geography, race, etc.
If these billionaires are so concerned about education, here's a novel idea- pay the correct amount in corporate taxes which would fund decent education. But I suspect, their hubris blinds them and they want control but under guise of philanthropy.
If these billionaires are so concerned about education, here's a novel idea- pay the correct amount in corporate taxes which would fund decent education. But I suspect, their hubris blinds them and they want control but under guise of philanthropy.
15
This is the fundamental problem in our country but yet our government does nothing while Americans quality of life deteriorates. This downward spiral and desperation is how we ended up with DJT as our president. The middle class is paying for roads, infrastructure, schools, police and everything else to keep the lights the lights on in this country. For some reason corporations don't seem to understand that they need to contribute to the education of their future employees and the upkeep of roads that their products need to be transported and a police force so they don't have to worry about being kidnapped. Pay up you can afford it.
2
The American social contract built during the 20th century has been served a cruel, Dickensian notice by the monied, conservative wing of the Republican party.
We live ever more in a new Victorian epoch - a state with decreasing public welfare, and diminishing and failing social safety net.
Soon the only investments into society will be coming from philanthropic donations, and increasingly on their terms. And will schools turn away "free money" when their whole curriculum is under a budget mandated chopping block?
Speaking of guillotines.
To modernize the immortal words of Marie Antoinette, the conservative anti-elite elitists can be heard saying "Let them eat Carls Jr." from their yachts, where counting their off-shore savings, they sing our President's melodious and patriotic tune of "not paying taxes ‘makes me smart".
It's a pirate's life, you see.
We live ever more in a new Victorian epoch - a state with decreasing public welfare, and diminishing and failing social safety net.
Soon the only investments into society will be coming from philanthropic donations, and increasingly on their terms. And will schools turn away "free money" when their whole curriculum is under a budget mandated chopping block?
Speaking of guillotines.
To modernize the immortal words of Marie Antoinette, the conservative anti-elite elitists can be heard saying "Let them eat Carls Jr." from their yachts, where counting their off-shore savings, they sing our President's melodious and patriotic tune of "not paying taxes ‘makes me smart".
It's a pirate's life, you see.
4
Farming out children education to robot tutors is problematic.
Hopefully we are only talking about identifying students who would be interested in that line of work. Let us not strangle poets, musicians, anthropologists, wanderers, dreamers in the name of efficiency.
Sometimes, through my years of teaching, I am wondering whether the problem is in the school or actually coming from the outside, from that cadre of well-intentioned humans fresh out of churches, education departments, business profit centers, unemployed statisticians, politicians, or budget analysts.
In other words from someone who has never read a book for pure enjoyment.
You have a certain group who says that Education has been overtaken by liberals. In the university I am in, teaching mathematics, I have yet to see one of these illuminated conservative making an appearance to, at least, check the opposition.
Then you have the business community who have never seen a student they did not like. After all, he/she is a future customer, for pete's sake.
Then, you have a cadre of parents who think that nurturing children around the kitchen table is not a workable model in this super-connected world.
And on and on.
Hopefully we are only talking about identifying students who would be interested in that line of work. Let us not strangle poets, musicians, anthropologists, wanderers, dreamers in the name of efficiency.
Sometimes, through my years of teaching, I am wondering whether the problem is in the school or actually coming from the outside, from that cadre of well-intentioned humans fresh out of churches, education departments, business profit centers, unemployed statisticians, politicians, or budget analysts.
In other words from someone who has never read a book for pure enjoyment.
You have a certain group who says that Education has been overtaken by liberals. In the university I am in, teaching mathematics, I have yet to see one of these illuminated conservative making an appearance to, at least, check the opposition.
Then you have the business community who have never seen a student they did not like. After all, he/she is a future customer, for pete's sake.
Then, you have a cadre of parents who think that nurturing children around the kitchen table is not a workable model in this super-connected world.
And on and on.
5
I have misgivings about tech billionaires thinking they can cure the ills of education. Just because one understands computers and their applications does not mean one understands children, educational psychology, sociology and teaching methods, all of which have major impact on education.
People have been trying to learn the best ways of teaching since Plato and have a history of techniques that work and techniques that do not work. Modern businesspersons tend to see students as products that can be turned out via mass production and time management. Yet people vary individually far more than do blocks of plastic or steel. They all react differently to stimuli -- no two are alike.
The worst disasters were caused by Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg who thought that they could improve the classroom by attacking teachers' unions and teachers themselves. It just isn't that simple. Paying according to student success doesn't work either because students vary so widely. Grading schools doesn't work either because neighborhoods are restricted by class and income, whether we like or not, and both affect the ability of children to learn.
I do welcome the billionaires attention. It helps to give computers and programming time to be used on classroom applications for teaching. Training teachers in technology is valuable as well. Research on the use of technology in the classroom is valuable, but using students as guinea pigs can be illegal.
People have been trying to learn the best ways of teaching since Plato and have a history of techniques that work and techniques that do not work. Modern businesspersons tend to see students as products that can be turned out via mass production and time management. Yet people vary individually far more than do blocks of plastic or steel. They all react differently to stimuli -- no two are alike.
The worst disasters were caused by Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg who thought that they could improve the classroom by attacking teachers' unions and teachers themselves. It just isn't that simple. Paying according to student success doesn't work either because students vary so widely. Grading schools doesn't work either because neighborhoods are restricted by class and income, whether we like or not, and both affect the ability of children to learn.
I do welcome the billionaires attention. It helps to give computers and programming time to be used on classroom applications for teaching. Training teachers in technology is valuable as well. Research on the use of technology in the classroom is valuable, but using students as guinea pigs can be illegal.
10
With the way technology is now being relied on for (basic) education, there's a huge chance for inequity here. What's going to happen when homework is assigned on a specific platform or proprietary program that costs money? Middle class students might be okay, since their parents can either afford to buy them or share their devices with their kids. But poor families that are just trying to make ends can't shell out hundreds of dollars for a tablet or fifty bucks an app. Even barring homework, students that can afford these technologies at home have the ability to get ahead of their peers that can't. Everyone from all walks of life has equal access to books, if not through the school, then through public libraries.
There's also another issue that these big tech companies are ignoring: the education facilities themselves. School performs the vital function of preparing children for life as a member of a social species. Physical school buildings and classrooms allow for everyday human interaction to be explored, and these physical spaces need to be maintained. You can't sit at a tablet if all the desks are falling apart. You can't have phys ed if the gym has a leaky roof and you can't spark discussion in a room that looks like a jail cell. It doesn't matter how much you pour in to sparkly tech. If the campus is falling apart, students won't be engaged, teachers won't be engaged, and the tech may start to fall apart quickly, too.
There's also another issue that these big tech companies are ignoring: the education facilities themselves. School performs the vital function of preparing children for life as a member of a social species. Physical school buildings and classrooms allow for everyday human interaction to be explored, and these physical spaces need to be maintained. You can't sit at a tablet if all the desks are falling apart. You can't have phys ed if the gym has a leaky roof and you can't spark discussion in a room that looks like a jail cell. It doesn't matter how much you pour in to sparkly tech. If the campus is falling apart, students won't be engaged, teachers won't be engaged, and the tech may start to fall apart quickly, too.
4
I believe Democrats fear this,since they may lose one of their primary supporters.Should be good for the country,if it promotes more free enterprise and less govt worship.
1
Public education, the very foundation of our democracy, is fast giving way to a privatization credo that believes in the superiority of a business model, without any basis for that belief. I go way back, remember Chris Whittle and the original Edison project invading the public schools with promises of educational progress for all. Fast forward to this millenium through public-private partnerships to charter schools, boutique curricula, and increased abdication of public schooling to a private sector intent on creating a system in its own image. The results have potentially disastrous consequences beyond education.
12
So, we are moving from teaching-to-the-test to teaching-to-the-brand. And when these companies disappear, how prepared and intellectually aware will those students truly be?
6
Amazing...very moving..such a ambitious effort for our young students!!! Great story! Thank you
1
"Facilitators" in my local school district make 22,000$ a year with no benefits because they only work 30 hours a week. Teachers start at 35,000$ (not including generous benefits) with pay going up to 65,000$ a year.
I give it 10 years, maybe 15 in CA where the teachers union will fight it, before there are no teaching jobs in public schools, only facilitators. Granted the "good" teachers can potentially get jobs at charters or private schools -- provided your 'views align with the core philosophy of the school' that is.
Guess all the science teachers out there should start studying up on "why climate change is a hoax" for their future jobs working for DeVos-Koch charter school Inc.
I give it 10 years, maybe 15 in CA where the teachers union will fight it, before there are no teaching jobs in public schools, only facilitators. Granted the "good" teachers can potentially get jobs at charters or private schools -- provided your 'views align with the core philosophy of the school' that is.
Guess all the science teachers out there should start studying up on "why climate change is a hoax" for their future jobs working for DeVos-Koch charter school Inc.
8
Do we really need an article that desperately flails about in attempt to find the bad in investing billions of dollars in education? Nothing is perfect. Am I really supposed to be wringing my hands in fear and worry about privately funded large investments in education? Apparently I should be.
Several checks on tech billionaires' ability to remake schools, among other potential checks, are (i) the schools themselves, which are not mandated to accept the money, (ii) families who have the ability to choose which school they attend, and (iii) local governments to the extent they're required to change laws to accommodate a grant. Why are these insufficient? If the author feels they're illusory then it would be helpful to know why.
The article points out that there is "limited research" on whether these new programs improve educational programs. Given how new many of these new initiatives are, how is it even possible that there would be detailed research on them? Why not just say that research for the time being is limited given the recent nature of many of these initiatives? That's accurate without the suggestion of something insidious.
This article amounts to little more than an attempt at Breitbart-style fear mongering that's been watered down and adjusted to fit a largely liberal reader base.
Several checks on tech billionaires' ability to remake schools, among other potential checks, are (i) the schools themselves, which are not mandated to accept the money, (ii) families who have the ability to choose which school they attend, and (iii) local governments to the extent they're required to change laws to accommodate a grant. Why are these insufficient? If the author feels they're illusory then it would be helpful to know why.
The article points out that there is "limited research" on whether these new programs improve educational programs. Given how new many of these new initiatives are, how is it even possible that there would be detailed research on them? Why not just say that research for the time being is limited given the recent nature of many of these initiatives? That's accurate without the suggestion of something insidious.
This article amounts to little more than an attempt at Breitbart-style fear mongering that's been watered down and adjusted to fit a largely liberal reader base.
5
I think that some of these silicon valley types are more interested in turning out drones and coders to work in tech companies and little else. A tech based educational pedagogy will not develop well rounded students.
10
I graduated from college in 2015 and I think most of the public education is failing anyways so why not try this one? At least they're giving money to schools that parents and grandparents don't want to give with their property taxes. In the past, before universal education, only those that really wanted to learn was given access to education. Now kids take it for granted and spend more time on social media than on homework. Old retired people don't want to support higher property taxes to pay for schools so their communities start to crumble and families leave for better areas. They don't care about others' children anyways. And some teachers and professors are simply worthless at actual teaching. Powerpoint presentation can only go so far in many classes. If I had more time to read on my own, more one-on-one tutoring time with a teacher who actually cared about me, I would have appreciated schools more. But people learn things at different rates and have different priorities all the time. I didn't like spending time with other students who weren't ready for the subject and I didn't feel comfortable if I felt any behind compared to my peers. I would want to home school my children if I don't want my kids to be in underfunded public schools. If I had money I would choose private schools or tutors. Even if I want to financially help schools, I'm no millionaire. At least those technocrats are doing something.
3
And none of them are actually educators. But because of their money they believe they know more about education than educators.
10
I love what the tech folks are doing; it's way past time to advance and improve how we do education in this country.
Some people will always wring their hands in fear of something going wrong, but having 1.6 million people in prison is a gentle hint that maybe, just maybe, something already has gone wrong.
For education I vastly prefer involvement by tech leaders over religious schools with their anti-science bias based on beliefs and doctrines from the dark ages.
Some people will always wring their hands in fear of something going wrong, but having 1.6 million people in prison is a gentle hint that maybe, just maybe, something already has gone wrong.
For education I vastly prefer involvement by tech leaders over religious schools with their anti-science bias based on beliefs and doctrines from the dark ages.
7
So, our only choice is between theology and coding?
4
The development of emotional intelligence is an important benefit of interactive socialization in school .........this benefit is lost when students and teachers interact through machines.
Giving students the ability to uniformly process,an algorithmic accumulation of facts,quickly and more efficiently..........helps them make better decisions without human intervention but doesnt teach them how to think....only teachers can, through assessing and developing the unique abilities of each individual learner.
We dont need to turn out students that are like Google self driving cars.....as the highest achievements of machine learning......hooked to Dreamworks games and Facebook...where the Medium becomes the Message!
Giving students the ability to uniformly process,an algorithmic accumulation of facts,quickly and more efficiently..........helps them make better decisions without human intervention but doesnt teach them how to think....only teachers can, through assessing and developing the unique abilities of each individual learner.
We dont need to turn out students that are like Google self driving cars.....as the highest achievements of machine learning......hooked to Dreamworks games and Facebook...where the Medium becomes the Message!
7
You can lead a child to a computer but you can't make them think for themselves.
This insane Silicon Valley snake oil is all about brain and social data mining and retaining future customers. Do not for a second think otherwise.
It's always about the money too, always.
These nouveau tech billionaires wouldn't know what altruism was, even if it bit them. Stop them before it is too late.
This insane Silicon Valley snake oil is all about brain and social data mining and retaining future customers. Do not for a second think otherwise.
It's always about the money too, always.
These nouveau tech billionaires wouldn't know what altruism was, even if it bit them. Stop them before it is too late.
19
Facebook being a privacy destruction machine, I fear what Mr. Zuckerberg thinks is a 'good' method for teaching.
12
This is silly. Adding new curriculum doesn't disrupt "the democratic process." Does the author want every method used and everything taught in a school run by the central office? looking back on your own education, do you think that Houghton-Mifflin reader was all that amazing? How about other educational products like scantron, Scholastic, and Success for All? Do we think those products had research that showed success? Just because Dreambox uses an algorithm, we are now claiming that it reduces teachers in the classroom-- not true. My school uses dreambox as a supplement to the math curriculum and as a tailored intervention for kids-- closely monitored.!it does a better job than my teacher Aline can do in assessing gaps in knowledge. What would you like instead, the teacher to create problems for every skill in math K-8? It's elitist and out of touch to say "the teacher should assess the student."Yes, but with what measure? Teachers have used tools like this for generations.
Schools are far behind in teaching students autonomy, self-motivation, independence, and tech skills. The world is changing. Some of their lessons should reflect the world they are entering. And folks who believe these billionaires are doing it for any reason than to bring re ways of teaching in the classroom are just paranoid.
Schools are far behind in teaching students autonomy, self-motivation, independence, and tech skills. The world is changing. Some of their lessons should reflect the world they are entering. And folks who believe these billionaires are doing it for any reason than to bring re ways of teaching in the classroom are just paranoid.
9
The tech companies want kids to learn to code so there will be an oversupply of programmers when the time comes. They just want cheap labor.
5
Until they can program robots to code.
3
The bottom line, after all, is that these promoters want to train students to buy and use their software in the future. That's it, free and simple.
There is no substitute for learning the basics from the ground up. Not to do so results in none of the students being able to count change, for example, or to know that two cups make a pint -- or even what a pint is.
Learning from the ground up creates a reasoning ability.
Attempting to learn from a computer only creates an ability to type -- poorly.
There is no substitute for learning the basics from the ground up. Not to do so results in none of the students being able to count change, for example, or to know that two cups make a pint -- or even what a pint is.
Learning from the ground up creates a reasoning ability.
Attempting to learn from a computer only creates an ability to type -- poorly.
6
Please take a moment to look at the big picture. This is not the childs entire education, it is one more aspect of it. Actually in today's world an important part of it. Look at it as replacing shop or home ec in their list of class requirements. I am not saying all children should be made to take them, I think if they have an aptitude for this then it should be an option and made available. I also agree that it would be amazing as others have posted if they did bring cooking back into the classrooms and music and art and languages. It's unfortunate that there isn't a benefactor for those as well.
I watched my grandson, 10 years old, teach himself via google, youtube and help files teach himself how to code using Scratch this weekend. He is teaching himself this stuff because he lives in a rural community in Illinois and doesn't have access to anything or anyone else that can teach him. AND HE IS 10 YEARS OLD. I WISH there was someone that would do this for him and his classmates.
All of my grandkids are into some form of coding in one way or . My 8 year old granddaughter is coding for Minecraft and has been for 2 or 3 years now and it BLOWS me AWAY!!!
They all do extremely well academically but are bored. Small town kids are falling through the cracks. I wonder if The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative would get as much pushback from smaller towns looking for funding?
I watched my grandson, 10 years old, teach himself via google, youtube and help files teach himself how to code using Scratch this weekend. He is teaching himself this stuff because he lives in a rural community in Illinois and doesn't have access to anything or anyone else that can teach him. AND HE IS 10 YEARS OLD. I WISH there was someone that would do this for him and his classmates.
All of my grandkids are into some form of coding in one way or . My 8 year old granddaughter is coding for Minecraft and has been for 2 or 3 years now and it BLOWS me AWAY!!!
They all do extremely well academically but are bored. Small town kids are falling through the cracks. I wonder if The Chan Zuckerberg Initiative would get as much pushback from smaller towns looking for funding?
21
I am encouraged when I see that some of the kids had to go back and study the material more thoroughly in order to pass a test. They had to learn something by themselves; I applaud that.
I was the teacher/parent dream: a straight A student, but I can tell you that it was the stuff I taught myself over my lifetime that has been most valuable. If these kids can learn to learn they will be able to do anything they think worthwhile.
Of course we need the basics: pints in a quart, feet in a mile etc. but that's, what, a month's work? Or maybe a year.
I just hate to see all the traditional "education" roadblocks put up to derail these programs. If there are some students who really cannot learn this way, let them and their teachers go to another class. Those who do well with these methods will reach their fullest potential and perhaps benefit the world.
Thanks to the millionaires for their money and their efforts.
I was the teacher/parent dream: a straight A student, but I can tell you that it was the stuff I taught myself over my lifetime that has been most valuable. If these kids can learn to learn they will be able to do anything they think worthwhile.
Of course we need the basics: pints in a quart, feet in a mile etc. but that's, what, a month's work? Or maybe a year.
I just hate to see all the traditional "education" roadblocks put up to derail these programs. If there are some students who really cannot learn this way, let them and their teachers go to another class. Those who do well with these methods will reach their fullest potential and perhaps benefit the world.
Thanks to the millionaires for their money and their efforts.
2
yes but lets not forget music programs. These tech fellow are all well and good for teaching us the virtues of technology but we also need music men to step in and save our small town schools. Otherwise we are going to have trouble with a capital "T".
2
If the "takers" for these schemes are under-funded schools, then perhaps we should just be taxing billionaires like every other leading nation, and spending the money to rebuild them into a source of both skilled and enlightened participants in democracy, rather than sources of (as has been said) cheaper labor for tech companies, not to mention computer addicts and mere consumers.
3
As a retired educator with 50 years experience what I find most concerning about billionaire influence in education is the fact that not only are these people not educators, they don't have any expertise in education. However they think that having been successful making money they can prescribe methods for educational success. Would they dare to reform doctors, plumbers, astronauts or other professions? Mark Benioff at least did not think he knows more than the professionals. He just gave them unrestricted funds and stepped out of the way. Mark Zuckerberg in particular seems to think he knows better than any teacher how children learn. It works for his employees so it must work for 12 and 13 year olds?
13
I am a business owner, retired French / Art middle school teacher and now a career advisor. There is a place for technology in our educational pedagogy/planning - as a tool - a conduit to encouraging student participation. However, in my experience, the best tools are those that require hands-on experiences that engage students with other human beings. I recently tested my theory that students stare into a screen and become hypnotized when I taught a course at a local college. I asked the students in the room (about 30) to close their computers and prove that they were actually listening to me. About half complied, while the others were off in space. There is a place for technology but perhaps not in the classroom.
9
I agree that students using technology for note taking in the classroom is not effective and there are studies now to support this contention. They become transcribers and do not absorb or process the information in the same way.
Your classroom might be conducive to just lecturing. But overall, across the disciplines, lecturing alone isn't enough anymore to help students negotiate a new technological world and bring a value added skill to their workplace.
Your classroom might be conducive to just lecturing. But overall, across the disciplines, lecturing alone isn't enough anymore to help students negotiate a new technological world and bring a value added skill to their workplace.
Notice that none of these "innovators" actually attended inner-city public schools themselves, nor do their own children.
14
Algorithms do not make educated human beings, but are good for programming serfs.
Teaching is not about merely feeding someone information with proprietary software. It is a complex, creative, social activity, and none of these "expert" godzillonaires in Silicon Valley would be anywhere without it.
Teaching is not about merely feeding someone information with proprietary software. It is a complex, creative, social activity, and none of these "expert" godzillonaires in Silicon Valley would be anywhere without it.
11
As a recently retired chemistry/middle school science teacher I see both sides of this dilemma. We are pushed to use the Chromebooks in our classes and they are good for some lessons. My students actually learn more and retain more doing hands-on labs and problem solving activities. The push is away from this and yet more and more of them are kinesthetic learners who want to build and test things, not look at a screen.
9
It would seem that the development of software for teaching and learning purposes--the two are not the same--bears certain parallels to the development of moveable type and its trasmogrification into ever cheaper printing and the greater and greater availability of ever lower-cost books. From this came the proliferation of libraries in more and more private hands, and the ability to re-focus teaching from listening to lectures and taking notes to reading source materials on one's own and making traditional lectures a guide and supplement to reading primary sources. It may be that the increasing use of educational software is a further development in which, with appropriate guidance, the goals of learning can be enhanced.
Nonetheless, not all learning depends on literacy. So it is important to recognize and enhance other modes of learning, such as learning to play an instrument, draw and paint an image, and so forth. There is also the matter of traditional apprenticeship, which amounts to the imparting of practical knowledge and technique. In short, successful teaching and learning require many tools and modes of behavior. It is important to avoid bedazzlement with an single mode.
Nonetheless, not all learning depends on literacy. So it is important to recognize and enhance other modes of learning, such as learning to play an instrument, draw and paint an image, and so forth. There is also the matter of traditional apprenticeship, which amounts to the imparting of practical knowledge and technique. In short, successful teaching and learning require many tools and modes of behavior. It is important to avoid bedazzlement with an single mode.
8
Ok, but the world cannot function with just coders, an idea that is anathema to Silicon Valley. I lived in the Bay Area for 23 years, 1990-2013, and taught at Berkeley during the time when the Valley exploded and essentially broke California's economy. Silicon Valley "think" is fine in that small corner of the world, but we need mechanics, cooks, and people that make things work other than coding lines and focusing on becoming billionaires. I met and lived in the neighborhood with 20-something millionaires and found their concept of the world stunted and tiny, in a way similar to those in Trump Nation with a liberal tint. Perhaps it's different now.
I think it's great that the emphasis is on math and science, but what if the student is more attuned to art, mechanics, or agriculture? I guess they can go across the Bay to Oakland or Sonoma to get a well rounded education.
I think it's great that the emphasis is on math and science, but what if the student is more attuned to art, mechanics, or agriculture? I guess they can go across the Bay to Oakland or Sonoma to get a well rounded education.
17
When these tech billionaires start sending their own children to schools that have "facilitators" and their children are left to learn via a computer, then I will believe that their "remaking" of public schools is about altruism.
Instead they pay $50,000/year for small class sizes.
And the NY Times writes a long puff piece in which these billionaires are never asked how their own children's schools are adapting these supposedly better tech programs.
Instead they pay $50,000/year for small class sizes.
And the NY Times writes a long puff piece in which these billionaires are never asked how their own children's schools are adapting these supposedly better tech programs.
17
Agreed, this is less news article, more business section press release. Zuckerberg discusses his "hope..to upgrade...schools to personalized learning," when there is zero research--only his fiscally motivated hope--showing so-called personalized learning to be effective, and not nearly enough science measuring the harm done to screen-addicted children.
This is privatization of public money on an unprecedented scale in response to fear-driven markets, not research. Admins are terrified their data will not measure up and are swatting at the next new thing dangled in front of them. Teachers have had no say and our voices are chilled by threats to our jobs.
The last public school where I taught, near the US-Mexican border, received a large portion of federal money in response to grinding poverty and so-called aspiration programs funding several sorts of software. Few of these apps communicated with each other and the hardware could not run many of the programs. Even done well, as in Maine where the one-to-one laptop program started 15 years ago, the digitization of public schools has had, at best, mixed success.
Not only do these billionaire so-called geniuses send their children to private schools, these schools usually have a decidedly no- or low-tech philosophy.
Private schools like the one where I teach now, have admins who cherish a vanishing breed of teacher focused on books and real life. The irony is not lost on us. Our students' wealthy parents mostly feel lucky.
This is privatization of public money on an unprecedented scale in response to fear-driven markets, not research. Admins are terrified their data will not measure up and are swatting at the next new thing dangled in front of them. Teachers have had no say and our voices are chilled by threats to our jobs.
The last public school where I taught, near the US-Mexican border, received a large portion of federal money in response to grinding poverty and so-called aspiration programs funding several sorts of software. Few of these apps communicated with each other and the hardware could not run many of the programs. Even done well, as in Maine where the one-to-one laptop program started 15 years ago, the digitization of public schools has had, at best, mixed success.
Not only do these billionaire so-called geniuses send their children to private schools, these schools usually have a decidedly no- or low-tech philosophy.
Private schools like the one where I teach now, have admins who cherish a vanishing breed of teacher focused on books and real life. The irony is not lost on us. Our students' wealthy parents mostly feel lucky.
7
Wealthier people aren't fooled as easily by shiny objects.
2
Computers have nothing to teach about management of one's own emotions under adversity.
11
No they don't. Parents have the ability and the responsibility to teach their children about management of one's own emotions under adversity. Computers are not meant to replace those parents who step up.
Don't be dazzled by what is in this article. Be dismayed by what is missing: specific learning outcomes and extensive, effective teacher training. Show me case studies with specific content that students learned and skills they acquired, and detail for me the pedagogy used to achieve those ends. Show me how teachers are being trained to ensure that the mentors and facilitators in the classroom are education (not just tech) professionals with expertise in child development and their subject area. Finally, take into account more deeply how this model is simply a continuation of the student as widget on a factory line. With the notable exception of Benioff's approach, Tech billionaires are looking awfully naive about the human element. And they are doing so, by the way, while ignoring the countless examples of rigorous, effective classroom instruction going on in my school and schools around the country.
19
Bill Gates spent a fortune turning regular schools into small schools in an effort to boost achievement, an experiment with no real plan. Then, he bailed and the schools were left to pick up the pieces. I'm not a fan.
12
OH, another 'great idea' to make the SF tech guys more rich only to put children further away from human contact with real teachers. Kids don't learn from looking at their world through screens.
It's all about money for the greedy and competitive geeks. Take a visit to SF and see for yourself....don't forget to visit Shallow Palto.
It's all about money for the greedy and competitive geeks. Take a visit to SF and see for yourself....don't forget to visit Shallow Palto.
17
Very well said since because now that San Francisco's dead, lol. Please excuse my nasty humor, but they sure have added nothing to the culture of SF as we knew it. Mostly killed it.
2
A small number of tech billionaires are willing to spend their own money to try out new ideas in public schools, by giving money with strings attached. And staying involved. And this is a problem because there aren't enough obstacles in the way?
In the past, such benefits would be reserved for the true elite in private schools, more recently for easy to educate fleeing to charters. But it's a problem now that it is in public schools, available to all in a geographic area.
Shame on you, NYT. Promote inequality on your op-ed or editorial page, not in your reporting.
In the past, such benefits would be reserved for the true elite in private schools, more recently for easy to educate fleeing to charters. But it's a problem now that it is in public schools, available to all in a geographic area.
Shame on you, NYT. Promote inequality on your op-ed or editorial page, not in your reporting.
2
It is painful to read the quotes from these "titans." Clearly, grammar is not a factor in their algorithms.
7
Better them than DeVos. There are few checks and balances to public education that can navigate between entrenched teacher unions and the corrupt self-interest of the GOP. Raising the next generation to be coders is unfortunate and short-sighted but still better than any other Trump/Ryan initiative. Besides Michelle Obama can you name anyone at the national level who actually puts kids and education first?
Zuckerburg dropped $250 million in the black hole in the public education system of Newark, face it, rich municipalities have good schools poor ones have bad schools, the wealthy educated their children and the poor try to keep them out of prison.
I've read a couple of similar NYT articles recently. None mention the Khan Academy, the fantastic and original learning site. So much so that at one point Bill Gates said it was like the greatest site ever. This article reads like a PR piece for the companies mentioned.
2
A gigantic waste of time and money. Academic achievement is determined by IQ, mostly genetic, a little environmental, a fact so dangerous to political correctness that it must never, ever be discussed.
2
This isn't education.
It's hypnosis.
It's hypnosis.
3
Hastings' DreamBox and Zuckerberg's Summit are being rolled out in charter schools. Charter schools are vitally interested in keeping down the costs of providing education to children. The most direct way to do this is to replace the major expense of education -personnel- that is, teachers, with computers. Have these edupreneurs spent a few years teaching children in public schools? Teaching and learning are interpersonal processes. They require individual coaching , questioning, and creativy and most importantly, relationship. How many subtle personal differences does DreamBox create with its 50,000 data points? Not many I'm guessing. What a scam. Go away tech billionaires. Sell your screen time snake oil elsewhere.
14
The difference between the old wealthy such as Carnegie, Rockefeller, Kennedy et al and the new technorich is that the former worked long and hard to build their wealth, while the latter largely became instant zillionaires on the back of an idea IPO. The old money certainly did not hesitate to throw its financial weight around. However, having worked their way up the food chain, they did not, unlike the technobrats, equate wisdom and morality with wealth.
9
The old wealth was largely built on the backs of poor and middle class labor. Only someone from that culture would think that "zillionaires" in Silicon Valley didn't "work" for their money. As one who could not do what they do and have done, I appreciate work of the mind as well as work of the muscle.
As a math geek I do support a self paced STEM introduction in middle school. From 4th to 8th grade the kids are exposed to teachers with at most a Minor in a hard STEM field. Those teachers might know the mechanics of teaching, but they did not love or fully understand sciences themselves. How on Earth are they going to lead, encourage and support STEM loving kids? Let us face it, no school district can afford to pay a STEM PhD to teach middle school classes. Next best is a "Mathletes" online program designed by STEM PhDs.
3
You've identified the issue but come to the wrong conclusion: plenty of inspiring Ph.D.s would teach if our culture understood that a good education is priceless and teachers hold the power to shape the future of our civilization and our planet. Only passionate experts can teach children to love their subjects -- and love learning. If the US teachers were paid salaries commensurate with their responsibilities, we'd have the best public education in the world.
3
In the 1930s, the citizens of Hershey, Pa., were wary and very unsupportive when Mr. Hershey wanted to fund projects in the town--despite the devastations of the Depression on their town's finances. They feared the power of an oligarch and would have preferred public funding. How times have changed. Now we fear the government and welcome private dollars. I wonder if people were wiser back then.
10
Don't wonder. They were.
2
Yes they were. Today so many parents, teachers, admins, B of Ed members all ohh and ahh over technology. They are uninformed and attracted to shiny objects.
3
Will this tech intervention guarantee that students who graduate high school understand words as esoteric as "century. decade, shun." Kids graduate with the vocabulary of a 1960's second grader. Yes, they can look up anything in their smart phones, but they forget what they've searched for within 5 minutes.
5
The Silicon Valley things who are purchasing islands to escape the chaos they are creating should also be the ones to decide U.S. education policy? Really?
12
Zuckerberg wants to cultivate an organic farm on his vast waterfront property in Kauai. Ellison owns the Hawaiian island of Lanai. They want to wait out the impending revolution or cataclysm in relative safety. Ditto New Zealand with tech giant Peter Thiel, calling it home. All the billionaires have hidey holes.
3
Education is a business. It has always been regulated, with varying effectiveness, by 1) government, 2) tax-payers and 3) consumers. It has always been a public private partnership. This article describes large scale tech company initiatives, that are now joining teacher training colleges, companies that develop and sell educational programs, products and tools, and the many other enterprises that fuel and shape the business of education and the learning experiences of children. The comments here express alarm because of scale, risk, marketing directly to parents and schools, by-passing the regulators. But it seems to me that these initiatives are built on the basic schooling principles of child-centered learning, student engagement, differentiated instruction, use of technology, and partnership. The San Francisco $100,000 grants are aligned with district priorities, the impact of DreamBox is being widely discussed and studied, and Zuckerberg personalized learning (which is not brand new by the way), when we get it right, may turn out to be the best way to learn in this world where all information sits in our back pockets 24/7. This seems like exciting stuff to me.
5
Every k-5 student in Baltimore County Public Schools uses Dreambox. Regarding the statement that the impact of Dreambox is being widely discussed and studied, concerns of parents and teachers are not part of any evaluation, and in our district are not sought. The evaluation reported on in this article does not support the conclusion that it is effective to improve learning, and the evaluation in our district does not have a rigorous study design.
7
Susan, Sounds as if you've drank the Silicon Valley kool-aid.
1
Nope, but I have spent many years working with low-performing schools.
1
This is a confused piece on contribution of Silicon Valley Billioners work on education. The old fashioned idea of input based measurement of programs are out of fashion today - today we measure programs by outcome. Putting dollar numbers in between to measure the outcome does not mean any thing. The second is the lack of discussion on learning and 100% learning by all students that Khan Accedemy attempts - is it ignorance or ententional. Learning is the most complex process and without discussing an underlying learning model, just dropping dollars will not change anything. Also we must understand the differences between the learning capacity of individuals.
3
One gets the feeling that our schools are being designed as old school, though shiny, technical schools to churn out new age factory line workers. The children are being taught how to use tools well. Nothing wrong with that per se, but parents might want to be aware of it. Liberal Arts was designed as an aternative program to historical technical training. Children were taught to think, see patterns, learn abstract concepts, to understand that learning and understanding comes with effort and struggle. It would seem to be better if technology tools could support liberal arts teaching (as our huge public school systems is so inadequately funded), but it seems the bells and shiny objects and fun games are so memorizing that we don't mind if most of our children are being groomed downward as the next generation to people the virtual or real assembly lines of the new age whatever those rote jobs may look like.
5
It's interesting to see various geographic patterns here. Sort of where are the salespeople most effective for each given product.
What should be being discussed primarily is when and how do we bring broadband basically everywhere the way we did the telephone system in the United States. As it is, many kids are having tremendous problems getting their homework done. They may not have wi-fi. Things like Google classroom seem to be working well as an adjunct to traditional instruction. But not replacing it.
The majority of this is just an out of control adventure in capitalism foisted by engineers and marketing people who mostly couldn't teach their way out of a paper bag. The people trained in education, at the university level should be calling the shots. Bill Gates is NOT an authority in any regard on what kids need. Much of this is madness, with tremendous ego and greed involved.
What should be being discussed primarily is when and how do we bring broadband basically everywhere the way we did the telephone system in the United States. As it is, many kids are having tremendous problems getting their homework done. They may not have wi-fi. Things like Google classroom seem to be working well as an adjunct to traditional instruction. But not replacing it.
The majority of this is just an out of control adventure in capitalism foisted by engineers and marketing people who mostly couldn't teach their way out of a paper bag. The people trained in education, at the university level should be calling the shots. Bill Gates is NOT an authority in any regard on what kids need. Much of this is madness, with tremendous ego and greed involved.
5
Have you ever taken an education class? In my 42 year career as a teacher, I had to take many. Most had no practical application to real world teaching and many were taught by people who had never taught in a public school.
1
Your logic (whatever it is) escapes me. So are you saying we might as well consider DeVos qualified because you found education classes not valuable?
1
The tech industry's plans to influence primary and secondary education is of concern to us all. Having worked in communications for a start up incubator program, I have become deeply concerned about the industry's interest, motives and their methods regarding education. Big Data is collected to pigeon hole students. What children watch online, the games they play and past performance can then be used to design 'personalized' lessons. A student who shows less interest or weakness in an area would be steered away from that subject, limiting the child's ability to gain knowledge, closing a door on learning and boxing students into convenient packages. This gives companies an opportunity to separate the less gifted, so to speak, from the future engineers and useful employees, robs children of their potential, and of their right and need to a full education. Teacher as facilitator is solid educational concept but has a vastly different meaning in this context.
I fully agree with some of the other's comments, if these philanthropists as you call them really want to help, they can start by paying their taxes and make a charitable donation to schools, no strings attached.
I fully agree with some of the other's comments, if these philanthropists as you call them really want to help, they can start by paying their taxes and make a charitable donation to schools, no strings attached.
12
Agreed. As Huxley would have put it, some will be developed as Alphas, some as Epsilons; they won't complain as they have been designed to assume they are as they should be. In our case, no eugenics will even be necessary.
4
Bingo! It's all about tracking students and collecting their personal data, grades, all that they can.
3
The ultimate goal of education is to promote a mindset of life-long learning, which I understand as a knowledge base to use in coping with today and preparing longer-range for the challenges of living. In the end, learning how to teach yourself produces the most important result. Many learning methods can be useful in reaching that goal.
The experiments reported in this article DO NOT leave out teachers; they 'tweak' their role.
Good teachers have always been mentors and facilitators for developing young students into successful young adults. Think about the teacher(s) you remember as being important in your life. Then think about our education system of using dubious fads to pour facts into young minds and then testing them with high-anxiety standardized instruments that have only a passing resemblance to classwork and reading.
I have both studied and taught. I use my home computer every day as a learning tool. I use instructional videos done by subject matter experts, who are also noted teachers in their fields, to keep up with the world's ever-expanding knowledge base. I have not been very successful in using computer-based foreign language instruction courses. College semesters spent with foreign language professionals were not a lot of help to me either. Learning is also dependent on areas of interest, motivation and native ability. Direct instruction can not go so far beyond where ability, motivation and interest end.
The experiments reported in this article DO NOT leave out teachers; they 'tweak' their role.
Good teachers have always been mentors and facilitators for developing young students into successful young adults. Think about the teacher(s) you remember as being important in your life. Then think about our education system of using dubious fads to pour facts into young minds and then testing them with high-anxiety standardized instruments that have only a passing resemblance to classwork and reading.
I have both studied and taught. I use my home computer every day as a learning tool. I use instructional videos done by subject matter experts, who are also noted teachers in their fields, to keep up with the world's ever-expanding knowledge base. I have not been very successful in using computer-based foreign language instruction courses. College semesters spent with foreign language professionals were not a lot of help to me either. Learning is also dependent on areas of interest, motivation and native ability. Direct instruction can not go so far beyond where ability, motivation and interest end.
4
A major improvement in science education can be achieved by including student research projects in every science class. We should not continue to believe that students can learn science without doing science. Citizen science offers a way to make this practical especially environmental investigations. Check out the many education related papers presented at the recent meeting of the Citizen Science Association.
5
Well, that's nice. They should start by funding a program to help grade school teachers understand long division, so the teachers can stop turning so many kids off to math.
5
Prima facie, this is good news. High-tech Silicon Valley billionaires are taking over outdated inefficient America's public educational system and bringing it to 21-century requirements.
However, since there is no such thing as a free lunch in the American capitalist system, one question comes to mind. What is the real purpose of such lovable endeavor? shall we call it a friendly takeover of the public educational system?
According to the NYT: " In the space of just a few years, technology giants have begun remaking the very nature of schooling on a vast scale, using some of the same techniques that have made their companies linchpins of the American economy. Through their philanthropy, they are influencing the subjects that schools teach, the classroom tools that teachers choose and fundamental approaches to learning."
According to the paragraph above, can we say high-tech executives are setting up, on the cheap, the foundation for a new generation of well-trained and affordable working force?
However, since there is no such thing as a free lunch in the American capitalist system, one question comes to mind. What is the real purpose of such lovable endeavor? shall we call it a friendly takeover of the public educational system?
According to the NYT: " In the space of just a few years, technology giants have begun remaking the very nature of schooling on a vast scale, using some of the same techniques that have made their companies linchpins of the American economy. Through their philanthropy, they are influencing the subjects that schools teach, the classroom tools that teachers choose and fundamental approaches to learning."
According to the paragraph above, can we say high-tech executives are setting up, on the cheap, the foundation for a new generation of well-trained and affordable working force?
1
The ultimate goal of tech companies isn't discussed yet: universal internet, a computer in every hand and then who needs teachers, schools or brick and mortar retailers- since everything is available online.
Think about that future.
Think about that future.
2
I'm reminded of the words in the song "If I Were a Rich Man" from "Fiddler on the Roof:"
"When you're rich, they think you really know."
"When you're rich, they think you really know."
7
As doc student working under a learning scientist, I fail to see how individualized programs such as those provided by DreamBox and Khan academy alone are going help American students. Nonetheless, the void left by government is being filled by the private sector (some would be happy with that status). Some folks in these comment threads have really been aggressive views towards the Silicon Valley giants and their presence in the education spheres and I understand why they harbour such feeelings - as one reader pointed out; if big corporations such as them paid enough taxes we may not need their philanthropy in the first place. The problem is accountability; how many of these software solutions in schools actually held responsible for the claims that they make. The rigor with which research based solutions coming out of universities are measured for efficacy is a far cry from market based research that is published by a company furthering their share of the education pie. But research based solutions are not sexy, they don't have a brand name attached to them, they often are not well publicised, and the list goes on. I would say to the tech giants if you really want to help American education - partner with the top education faculty in this nation. And let the people who have dedicated their lives to improving student learning outcomes (for all student not just the lucky few ) provide your products the rigor that they lack.
12
I'm not sure this trend is a good thing, but the idea of teacher as mentor/guide rather than primarily for content distribution as described in the article is already being done by teachers and professors. (Sometimes folks say to be "the guide on the side instead of the sage on the stage") I'm not sure how widely active learning is used, but most of our core courses in my tech-heavy university department do so, for example. This method is called active learning. Sometimes it's used in conjunction with "team-based learning." And there is a ton of research showing it's significantly better for students and improves learning. Star students will learn no matter what you method is used, but most do much better in a hands on active learning classroom. I wish the journalists writing this piece could have acknowledged that this isn't some new idea -- it's more that it's a concept the Silicon Valley companies are capitalizing on that fits their agendas. That being said, if the tech powerful don't provide tools for teaching programming, it probably won't happen in public education. Just too big a task. Challenges like, for example, what trained programmer is going to say yeah, I'll turn down this high paying job to teach for next to nothing. Not many will. Plus, we do need more programmers and it is a modern skill set and way of problem solving ("computational thinking") that students should acquire or at least be exposed to conceptually in a modern education.
why are entrepreneurs who change their business models constently and fail 90% of the time considered experts while "bureaucrats" that have focused a lifetime on public service and spent many years embedded in social and educational processes (and all the complexity, challenges, and contradictions that implies) considered inept? when can we finally disrupt the disrupters and solve issues democratically?
10
Makes sense to develop cyber tools that feel comfortable to today's generation of students. Reminds me of the old SRS reading comprehension system we used in my middle school days. Now these corporations need to help developing re-training for adults to help them get employed in higher tech jobs, something the government keeps promising, but never fulfills.
1
Some of the GAFE tools and these ideas are very worthy. Dreambox is a useful tool that students use for about twenty minutes a day in school or at home for homework. It supports math instruction. Self-directed learning is effective for some secondary students; most lack the maturity, drive, and psychological safety to effectively learn independently. Schools always need money, but the issues remain: 1) Billionaires buy access to the public schools that taxpayers primarily support as well as future customers for their products. This is a corruption of the public sphere. 2) Parents don't really have any "choice" in how the curriculum is skewed by the reliance on laptop and internet in education. It's better than a DeVos religious voucher experience, another billionaire who bought the system, but when do teachers and educators actually get a say in how schools are run? In providing tools, choices, possible internships and future vocations, these rich internet giants offer something wonderful. As sausage makers, they represent further degradation of the teaching profession. I'd be nice it more a clear line were drawn, but with the current administration, it seems that the public sphere is bought and sold rather than negotiated thoughtfully and respectfully.
9
So many, (parents, admin, Boards of Ed, teachers), get on the happy, high tech bandwagon and click accept without reading the fine print. We're handing over to them our children's minds.
May as well put a free candy and soda machine in every classroom too.
May as well put a free candy and soda machine in every classroom too.
16
The Silicon Valley elite have some useful educational ideas, but I do not think having students taught solely by software programs with the teachers as facilitators is one of those effective ideas. Software will not be able to differentiate its teaching to the particular needs of the individual learner. And software will not be able to answer specific student questions. Some students like to learn using computers but that's not true of all students, so the other students would be at a disadvantage with a computer software teacher that cannot look the student in the eyes and talk.
3
Personally, I would prefer that these tech giants simply paid their fair share of taxes. That way the highly skilled workers in schools and hospitals would Have sufficient resources to lead reforms in their own domains. I believe that the education of children should not be controlled by people who are not trained teachers and who stand to profit from data collected in the process.
14
All that you say may be true, however, constant testing benefits the test makers so there has always been some company interfering in learning for profit! The operative word here is "tools". I am a former teacher and I can see such wonderful potential here: an independent program to teach ESL students, a gifted & talented program for those who finish their regular school work to teach themselves a subject that captures their interest, programs to help the slower student grasp the material he/she needs to know in order to move to the next grade, etc. Teachers, will always be needed because children need that interaction. Kids would no longer be yanked out of their classroom to go to special reading, for example! I saw just a small example of this kind of technology in the use of "Smartboards".
I was blown away during a demonstration for the parents. We were playing math games & the students beat the parents every time! What fun! Yes, the teachers would need training but none of those I talked to minded when it made their teaching easier to reach their students!
If used correctly, technological innovations could bring about an educational renaissance! It could provide intelligent workers for these various companies ( where's the downside there) & well- prepared college bound students! Yep, lots of bugs to work out but the potential , folks, the potential!
I was blown away during a demonstration for the parents. We were playing math games & the students beat the parents every time! What fun! Yes, the teachers would need training but none of those I talked to minded when it made their teaching easier to reach their students!
If used correctly, technological innovations could bring about an educational renaissance! It could provide intelligent workers for these various companies ( where's the downside there) & well- prepared college bound students! Yep, lots of bugs to work out but the potential , folks, the potential!
Make no mistake, the billionaires of Silicon Valley and elsewhere have one purpose in mind and that is to absorb much of the billions of dollars spent in education, through one vehicle or another, whether it helps kids or not. And they will do it undemocratically: using their staggering wealth to put in the fix. Money is power. In California, billionaires from Silicon Valley have joined forces with other powerful interests, such as the Waltons, to spend millions of dollars in state legislative elections to elect legislatures who are pro-charter schools, a current favorite vehicle of the billionaire set to grab control of the education market. Twenty-three of the 24 candidates they backed won. And in Los Angeles, this same group, and prominently Netflix's Hastings, made a local school board election the most expensive school board race in history - exceeding the cost of most Senate races - to buy two seats, and thus a majority of the Los Angeles School Board for shills of charter schools. This is not philanthropy; this is big business buying out education. It is not democracy; it is plutocracy.
11
Silicon Valley only has one objective: to sell products. Students only need a pencil, paper, and a knowledgeable engaged teacher. All these other toys only detract from learning. They are just supplemental tools. We are already experiencing the result of a market-driven interest in technology: education is in decline in this country.
14
Reading most of these comments makes me wonder if any of you went to public schools in the US.
The US K-12 public education system is, by and large, failing when compared to the less-well-funded systems of other developed nations.
It sounds like every one of these evil Silicon Valley billionaires cares more about kids succeeding at STEM than all but a couple of my public-school math and science teachers...
The US K-12 public education system is, by and large, failing when compared to the less-well-funded systems of other developed nations.
It sounds like every one of these evil Silicon Valley billionaires cares more about kids succeeding at STEM than all but a couple of my public-school math and science teachers...
3
Appalling. Billionaires and their tech companies actually exhibiting corporate social responsibility... Local corporations leading the way in financing and helping create new curriculum that will actually get students jobs when they graduate... Students, God forbid, learning apps and services they will use in the workforce... learning tailored to each student in real time... appalling indeed. while the recalcitrant trolls of tradition hiss, Silicon Valley will continue to innovate.
3
I don't think anyone is against innovation or even teaching technology, but limiting education to a "learn to earn" mentality will create a shallow, materialistic, generation with hindered capacity to evaluate human dilemmas.
3
It's worth remembering that "try everything you can" will not succeed in every instance. Who picks up the pieces when an experiment with real students goes bad? (Please note, these are my kids you're experimenting with.)
If more than a quarter-century of teaching at a state university has taught me anything, it's that "teaching is retail". In other words, you as a teacher have to engage with your students as individuals; without that engagement, nothing of value takes place, no matter how big or popular your class may be.
To the extent that technology can support my job of engaging with students, great. I'll use all the help I can get. But the idea that technology can replace individual engagement is delusional.
If more than a quarter-century of teaching at a state university has taught me anything, it's that "teaching is retail". In other words, you as a teacher have to engage with your students as individuals; without that engagement, nothing of value takes place, no matter how big or popular your class may be.
To the extent that technology can support my job of engaging with students, great. I'll use all the help I can get. But the idea that technology can replace individual engagement is delusional.
7
I am always disturbed when I hear people say that people with background in a subject should teach it, without any teacher-training first, and worse yet when they say kids should be given machines. Teaching is an incredibly important job, for the growth and development of children into adults who can think independently, clearly, and logically, as well as with empathy for and knowledge about others, and the world outside themselves. Any subject being taught can only do that with a real live warm bright connected-to-students teacher--not any type of machine, and not by having some sort of expert on the subject talk about it to them. That is not the same thing as teaching, which at its best is a wonderful collaborative event. Students are then learning to actually think, which is required for any subject. This is why subjects such as English, writing, literature, history, and geography are so important. You can't succeed in math or science--or computers--if you can't read in depth, and write clear cogent sentences about what you have read, what you think about it, and why. If you know little about history you will understand little about why things are happening now; about geography, you will lack understanding about the earth on which you live, and what and who it contains in addition to yourself. These are ways to learn how to think clearly, with understanding. With a real teacher, you also learn to interact warmly with others, and with respect; the basics of life.
14
Thank you PW from California for saying so plainly what strikes me as obvious, but what is quickly fading from public understanding. "Schooling" (as it is called in the first section of this article) is not the same as educating, and high-tech hijacking of public education is the stuff of Isaac Asimov and Aldous Huxley.
6
I was ready to recommend this comment after the first sentence. Nothing thereafter contradicted my initial impulse. Subject expertise is important, but without a generous capacity for human connection, no teacher can possibly reach a useful percentage of their students.
7
More support for math and science learning is very much needed. Teacher advancement needs to be based on what teachers know, not just on passing some course on a new theory of teaching.
I'm not a fan of computer based learning. I understand more and retain more when I present it to others, and especially when I argue about an interpretation with others.
I'm not a fan of computer based learning. I understand more and retain more when I present it to others, and especially when I argue about an interpretation with others.
5
You are not alone re: how you learn, this is common to most! which is why virtual K-12 schools have abysmal results. In a rightside-up world, taxpayers would only support such programs for the home-bound.
In NJ you can't teach math in middle or high school unless you majored in it.
In NJ you can't teach math in middle or high school unless you majored in it.
Apple might now revisit its successful approach of the early '80s - particularly its efforts with LOGO which enabled and stimulated Discovery Learning, instead of learning by rote, . . . .
"Apple's sustained growth during the early 1980s was partly due to its leadership in the education sector, attributed to their adaptation of the programming language LOGO, used in many schools with the Apple II. The drive into education was accentuated in California with the donation of one Apple II and one Apple LOGO software package to each public school in the state. The deal concluded between Steve Jobs and Jim Baroux of LCSI, and having required the support of Sacramento, established a strong and pervasive presence for Apple in all schools throughout California. The initial conquest of education environments was critical to Apple's acceptance in the home where the earliest purchases of computers by parents was in support of children's continued learning experience."
"Apple's sustained growth during the early 1980s was partly due to its leadership in the education sector, attributed to their adaptation of the programming language LOGO, used in many schools with the Apple II. The drive into education was accentuated in California with the donation of one Apple II and one Apple LOGO software package to each public school in the state. The deal concluded between Steve Jobs and Jim Baroux of LCSI, and having required the support of Sacramento, established a strong and pervasive presence for Apple in all schools throughout California. The initial conquest of education environments was critical to Apple's acceptance in the home where the earliest purchases of computers by parents was in support of children's continued learning experience."
1
American public educational system and probably most of the private educational system are pretty dismal. The various Boards of Ed are not interested in education per se, but in numbers, upticks, downticks, test results, minority achievements, etc. that have nothing to do with education and is all about politics. The school curriculum is shallow, boring, not challenging to most students and frankly, the teachers are not so great. How many really smart people would go and teach for the measly amounts teachers earn. Besides, this country does not want educated people, because they would question the garbage in the media and the garbage the politicians spew out, so if we had a semi-educated society, most of the politicians we currently have would never have been elected. Keep the masses ignorant and dumb everything down under the pretense of "fairness". In waltzes a tech billionaire, who himself may not be so well educated, but probably better than average, and who has certain ideas of what "education" is. Kids now get new gadgets to play with and probably do learn certain skills that are critical for today's market, but is that an education? Kids teaching themselves? The blind leading the blind? May be this society needs to go back to the board, blackboard or smartboard and figure out what is meant to be an educated person and how to raise one. That is missing in America, and when such rare birds do appear, they are derided.
8
You make some good points, but I was sad to see you write "how many really smart people would go and teach for the measly amounts teachers earn?" Many, I think, because I have had great teachers all my life, and I know many great teachers now. They do this because it matters so much, and because they love it, and love the students. In impoverished schools they buy their own supplies so their kids will have some. They work weekends on lessons, spend their summers on second jobs so they can make ends meet. They are the opposite of those who "know the cost of everything, and the value of nothing." Remember they are there.
10
Nice rant… I'm jealous!
These billionaire computer geeks are pushing just another educational fad. Where is the proof that their programs improve student learning?
3
Right! Why would any district buy into this or any ed-fad w/o results? Only because somebody's paying somebody at the state level to buy product. This doesn't happen so much in NJ as we are ornery locals who pay hi RE taxes for good schools & our BOEd mtgs are well-attended by vociferous citizens. Democracy at the municipal level-- where the lion's share of school costs are borne-- is the corrective. If fed & state are paying in little, their influence should be legally curtailed.
1
Tech is a tool and can be used to expand kids' horizons, or it can be used to stultify and cheapen education. Good tech: Code.org is a fun way for kids to learn about programming, a discipline of logic and creativity. Bad tech: making kids take mind-numbing standardized tests via computer when they can barely type or even write well. The billionaires should ask: what kind of school do I send my own kid to? and what does my kid get at home that helps them be ready to learn? And then they should strive to replicate THAT in public schools, with input from the best veteran teachers.
5
Many tech millionaires send their own kids to Waldorf schools (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silico.... What does that tell you about these initiatives? (Hint: this is about money and about using the nation's children as a captive audience of consumers. These "gifts" come with a nice big tax deduction and no accountability--probably a good investment...)
2
But since Silicon Valley billionaires get rich by cornering markets-- not by virtue of their altruistic concern for the public good-- their influence should be legally curtailed. Campaign reform, & legislation to overturn Cit-United decision!
1
We should be figuring out a way for teachers to receive great training and continuing education throughout their careers. We should be figuring out a way for teachers to get paid $100,000 a year.
Instead, we're laying the groundwork for robots to teach, for teaching to be automated. We always want to throw money and technology at problems. We just don't believe in people-based solutions.
This country is quickly becoming a very disheartening place to live.
Instead, we're laying the groundwork for robots to teach, for teaching to be automated. We always want to throw money and technology at problems. We just don't believe in people-based solutions.
This country is quickly becoming a very disheartening place to live.
12
I hope something good comes of these initiatives, but I doubt it. What we really need are better trained and paid teachers. Too many people we get are not really qualified and could never be trained to be qualified. And who would work for starvation wages? You often but not always get what you pay for.
We need a lot more well-funded special ed focused on K-3 so kids get the early support they need and don't fall behind. We need free after school programs.
We should use evidence-based reading and math programs and not the latest craze that some parent forces on the district.
We need to train creative critical thinking. Or else we won't survive.
We need a lot more well-funded special ed focused on K-3 so kids get the early support they need and don't fall behind. We need free after school programs.
We should use evidence-based reading and math programs and not the latest craze that some parent forces on the district.
We need to train creative critical thinking. Or else we won't survive.
11
The teacher unions will accept higher salaries, but that's about it—higher standards for teachers are a non-starter for thd defenders of American educational mediocrity!
"Some parent" forces on the district? In my state-- probably yours too-- this garbage is mandated directly on the municipal taxpayer-- who bears the brunt of school costs-- by unelected state ed officials w/their snouts in the influence-peddling trough. Change that. State pays in barely 4% to my district (most local taxes redistributed to poor districts): they should get 4% say-so-- oh hey I'll give them 10% benefit of doubt-- but no more.
1
Its not undemocratic. Givers have influence how their money is spent. I think what the tech companies is doing is good.
Someone with lots of money may even want a school to teach anti-climate science or anti-evolution science. The real thing being missed here is that the US Government has walked away from health and education. This is what happens if the biological parent walks away from their child. You get Mylan doing what they do, and you get anyone else interested to do good or bad to the child. The companies will fail if they try this in any other developed country who will reject funding if they dont like it as they own and pay for their schools.
Someone with lots of money may even want a school to teach anti-climate science or anti-evolution science. The real thing being missed here is that the US Government has walked away from health and education. This is what happens if the biological parent walks away from their child. You get Mylan doing what they do, and you get anyone else interested to do good or bad to the child. The companies will fail if they try this in any other developed country who will reject funding if they dont like it as they own and pay for their schools.
2
@PKJharkhand: "...the US Government has walked away from health and education."
The various pieces of the US Government have been rented out to the mega-wealthy, each of which has his/her own agenda.
The various pieces of the US Government have been rented out to the mega-wealthy, each of which has his/her own agenda.
while some jurisdiction still squabble over whether to teach evolution, these CEOs do their part to make sure our kids learn something useful.
2
Wake up. If there's $ to be made in teaching intelligent design, they'll do that too. Bet they're already on it for the deep-red market.
1
Two important factors to keep in mind: balance and imagination. Schools do more than prepare students for jobs. They prepare students to be responsible persons and good citizens. Responsible people that can weigh decisions about moral conduct and participating and protecting our democratic way of life. It's unclear that technologized schooling will help in these goals. But technologized schools do risk both democracy and the basis of all effective personal and collective life, imagination. Imagination always exceeds the bounds of bureaucracy and technology. If either shuts down creativity and engagement with life, then it shuts down life, both personal and collective. I applaud these business persons' desire to help the USA and education. So long as they recognize that the effort isn't about them but rather about aiding US democracy, balanced living, and fertile imagination.
7
Bravo, Ken Zimmerman! Perhaps the think to laud here is that creative, enthusiastic, charismatic, and imaginative people are interested in education and sharing that enthusiasm with young people. It can be infectious and provide a wonderful example for kids to follow. Perhaps the things to fear are the motives of the tech titans, the business-model approaches to education, and the penchant for educational accrediting bodies to try to get the quickest and most measurable metrics out of a curriculum rather than holistically work on a student's development.
4
Humans and human development are complex. Schooling must recognize and accept this complexity. And make it the basis of its work. Technologists, while often creating complexity frequently want to filter it out in building the world they see in their imaginations. Not uncommon in human history. But to be avoided if possible. Particularly as we aspire to democratic life.
3
We can transform schools from the agrarian (summers off so the children can work in the fields) and industrial eras (kids in a central location on a fixed schedule) to more of a self-paced curriculum suited to prepare students for a high-tech, high-touch future.
That is, if the teachers' unions and bureucrats approve....
That is, if the teachers' unions and bureucrats approve....
If you live in Houston, you should certainly know that Texas is a right-to-work state.
Teacher "unions" in Texas are nothing like unions in the Northeast.
Teachers have zero voice or power in Texas. Which is why the urban districts can't find teachers...
Teacher "unions" in Texas are nothing like unions in the Northeast.
Teachers have zero voice or power in Texas. Which is why the urban districts can't find teachers...
4
and in NC, and in FL, and in AK, I could go on. Teachers' unions never had more than 60% of states pre-2000's, & since rust-belt et al Rep takeovers of govrships/ legislatures, another dozen states have rendered public unions toothless in exchange for underfunding public education. The union-busting argument is the province of old fogies living in the deep past.
1
I love the idea that we can super-promote maths education. Will this work like the sports programs at school so we could see high school kids “go pro”grammer without going to college? Will they be getting the multimillion $ contracts? It may not be a bad idea to boost these opportunities when we look at the robotic future being proposed. With an ever-expanding use of machines displacing the human worker, there will be a need to keep the programs for them constantly updated.
Will the students who don’t fit the mold become psychologists? They might be in demand for another form of updating ,to assure that the world has some semblance of sanity.
Will the students who don’t fit the mold become psychologists? They might be in demand for another form of updating ,to assure that the world has some semblance of sanity.
4
A few years ago Mark Zuckerberg donated $100 million to the Newark school system. The money sank without a trace. What does that tell you?
7
It tells us that Zuckerberg knew nothing about the socio-economic environment of that system. Newark has a long history of crime and poverty and all the attendant ills which that produces. His money would have been better spent on housing upgrades, help for local neighborhoods, support for poor families struggling to survive on minimum wage. They were not raising children who would jump at advanced education opportunities; they were barely getting by.
6
It is gross journalistic laziness to call Zuckerberg or any other social media entrepreneur a "tech giant".
Internet sites and social media vehicles are not tech. They are media.
Tech involves actual physical structures, like semiconductors, fiber optics, and RF links..which enable those media.
You want to know why we may be falling behind other nations in technology development? Technologically illiterate media.
For shame, NYT!
Internet sites and social media vehicles are not tech. They are media.
Tech involves actual physical structures, like semiconductors, fiber optics, and RF links..which enable those media.
You want to know why we may be falling behind other nations in technology development? Technologically illiterate media.
For shame, NYT!
7
Great distinction you make. And such an insightful and productive contribution to the conversation. C'mon, man. Get over yourself.
1
Great observation. One might see how far the observation applies to the tech the donors are handing out like candy.
Are they teaching tools or are tehy really promoting endless, mindless interacrion with tiny screens?
Are they teaching tools or are tehy really promoting endless, mindless interacrion with tiny screens?
As an urban public school educator, former PTA president and father of 3 who graduated from St Paul (district) public schools, who has been involved at school and policy levels for more than 40 years, I'm disappointed by what seems to be pervasive bias of this story/quasi editorial.
No one is forcing a district or school to use the approaches that the wealthy people mentioned here are promoting. Are this author and the NY Times editors convinced that it's not worth trying new ideas?
Where is the NY Times coverage of Carnegie Foundation effort to promote millions of dollars of tax funds to support the National Board for Professional Teaching? Where is the NY Times coverage of expenditures by the Ford Foundation to promote or oppose certain policies in education?
No one is forcing a district or school to use the approaches that the wealthy people mentioned here are promoting. Are this author and the NY Times editors convinced that it's not worth trying new ideas?
Where is the NY Times coverage of Carnegie Foundation effort to promote millions of dollars of tax funds to support the National Board for Professional Teaching? Where is the NY Times coverage of expenditures by the Ford Foundation to promote or oppose certain policies in education?
3
This is such a trivial article, Times reporters dressing themselves up to resemble the intrepid crusaders of "60 Minutes". This is not journalism. This is role-playing. Decisions about what happens in schools are made by elected officials and the people who elect them. Random anecdotes are not data. It would be nice if the Times would realize that.
3
Anecdotes are not data, but they may be news. I see nothing presented as data, for either "side," but these things are happening nonetheless.
Ironic and sad that the main corporate benefactors of the H1B visa which has replaced millions of US citizens with cheap guest labor, are pushing computer science on high school kids.
Maybe they should focus on supporting and promoting people that want to build software. Help make it a career. Kids are not stupid, why work in an industry that treats them like replaceable widgets.
couple that with the workaholic culture of these billionaires and you have a dysfunctional culture
"It’s not hard to understand why such a mythology serves the interest of money men who spread their bets wide and only succeed when unicorns emerge."
https://m.signalvnoise.com/trickle-down-workaholism-in-startups-a90ceac7...
Maybe they should focus on supporting and promoting people that want to build software. Help make it a career. Kids are not stupid, why work in an industry that treats them like replaceable widgets.
couple that with the workaholic culture of these billionaires and you have a dysfunctional culture
"It’s not hard to understand why such a mythology serves the interest of money men who spread their bets wide and only succeed when unicorns emerge."
https://m.signalvnoise.com/trickle-down-workaholism-in-startups-a90ceac7...
10
Appalling, Unethical and Destructive
In rigorous, academic experimental designs, especially when it comes to children as human subjects, researchers have to go through Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to get their research approved to ensure that the experiments they're conducting cannot do harm to their subjects. In the case of children, parents also have to sign "informed consent" documents if the experiments were to pass muster with the IRB.
In the case of billionaires experimenting with our children described, they run around this critical process to protect our children. We have already seen signs of technology's toll on kids of all ages and now - unfettered with billions more to be made from schools and kids as they grow up - with absolutely no expertise or scrutiny whatsoever - the tech titans are programming our kids in their own image while sending their own children to schools that ban technology because they know what can happen to critical thinking when technology, instead of direct human experience, rule the day.
We need an immediate moratorium on this unethical and destructive influence before generations are lost to machines forever. This isn't philanthropy, it's potentially massive crimes against humanity.
In rigorous, academic experimental designs, especially when it comes to children as human subjects, researchers have to go through Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) to get their research approved to ensure that the experiments they're conducting cannot do harm to their subjects. In the case of children, parents also have to sign "informed consent" documents if the experiments were to pass muster with the IRB.
In the case of billionaires experimenting with our children described, they run around this critical process to protect our children. We have already seen signs of technology's toll on kids of all ages and now - unfettered with billions more to be made from schools and kids as they grow up - with absolutely no expertise or scrutiny whatsoever - the tech titans are programming our kids in their own image while sending their own children to schools that ban technology because they know what can happen to critical thinking when technology, instead of direct human experience, rule the day.
We need an immediate moratorium on this unethical and destructive influence before generations are lost to machines forever. This isn't philanthropy, it's potentially massive crimes against humanity.
16
Nearly all of this is true, especially what you've said about the IRB standards being skirted by Big Money, and I would be surprised if anyone else notices. I don't think the difference between an outstanding education and an ordinary one has ever been greater since we committed our societies to providing universal education.
I taught in college for nearly 20 years, and this was the first year when it was impossible to keep students from using their "smart phones" throughout class. We do know what works -- reading and reading and reading. We also know what students do less and less of, every year.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jan/09/decline-children-reading-p...
http://cte.virginia.edu/teaching-tips/book-review-why-dont-students-like...
I taught in college for nearly 20 years, and this was the first year when it was impossible to keep students from using their "smart phones" throughout class. We do know what works -- reading and reading and reading. We also know what students do less and less of, every year.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/jan/09/decline-children-reading-p...
http://cte.virginia.edu/teaching-tips/book-review-why-dont-students-like...
4
The internet is the best teacher I've ever had. It has vast knowledge, no agenda and it's never too rushed to answer my questions no matter how arcane.
I look forward to it fulfilling its limitless potential to teach.
I look forward to it fulfilling its limitless potential to teach.
1
Try reading about something in depth. That most likely will require going to a building called a library or a bookstore. There you might find another limitless potential.
4
Yes, who needs education? Or even schools, for that matter If you want to know anything, just google it!
2
Remember GIGO: garbage in garbage out. Search engines are programmed to send you to the material that its algorithms have decided you want to see based on previous searches. Inevitably, without a great effort to avoid it, you will be talking to ourself in a mirrored chamber. I saw a wonderful quote in a school library: "Google will give you a hundred million answers. The librarian is trained to help you figure out the probable answers."
6
I would rather have Mark Zuckerberg or Bill Gates in charge of our schools than Betsy DeVos.
2
Her agenda is identical to their agenda. It sounds as if you're distracted by optics.
They all want that from you. Keep on trucking.
They all want that from you. Keep on trucking.
OK. But who would you choose, between Bill Gates and Randy Weingarten?
There's more hard evidence of the deleterious effects of our society's rampant technology and internet addiction than there is of any improved learning and /or brain development brought about by software and devices vs. books and actual human teachers.
And then there are the increasing number of scientific studies recommending limits on Wi-fi and other EMF radiation to which children's developing brains are being exposed.
Too many school districts, deprived of both adequate budgets for teachers and facilities as well as of yes, imagination, are sitting ducks for fat cats (let's call them what they are) who want to justify with their own wealth the value of every child's fluency with the world of code and computing.
Together with the likes of Apple, they can feel good they are "giving back" at the same time as they are creating an ad infinitum annuity of profit for their services and products.
Meanwhile, exactly where are these kids going to learn to interact with other humans and become a part of a cohesive society? Or do these programs teach the subject of "Non-Digital Human Socialization and Interaction" too?
And then there are the increasing number of scientific studies recommending limits on Wi-fi and other EMF radiation to which children's developing brains are being exposed.
Too many school districts, deprived of both adequate budgets for teachers and facilities as well as of yes, imagination, are sitting ducks for fat cats (let's call them what they are) who want to justify with their own wealth the value of every child's fluency with the world of code and computing.
Together with the likes of Apple, they can feel good they are "giving back" at the same time as they are creating an ad infinitum annuity of profit for their services and products.
Meanwhile, exactly where are these kids going to learn to interact with other humans and become a part of a cohesive society? Or do these programs teach the subject of "Non-Digital Human Socialization and Interaction" too?
6
And what grounds do tech millionaires have for making decisions about what is taught in history, literature, philosophy? Whatever they may know about teaching "coding," they know precious little about the tradition of the humanities questioning their motives, means, and limitations.
4
Information technology has democratized information and education and some people are very inhappy about that, none of whom are students.
Data is not information. Anything you find on the net has been placed there by an author. Children don't need to learn how to operate computers, they need to learn how to understand computers and how they are just programmed machines
1
NYT needs to display the words "FROM OUR ADVERTISERS."
7
The problem is there are other billionaires like the Secretary of Education who would not only not participate but would oppose any initiative save for closing all public schools. I wonder what the Koch brothers or the Walton family would contribute as well.
I'd also like to see an education tax on the mega-corps like Apple and Google et. al.
American kids really get the short end of the stick. And education gets short shrift from the states as well. I wonder what Republicans think of all this. Oh, I know. Education is a personal responsibility and parochial schools should receive more taxpayer funds.
I'd also like to see an education tax on the mega-corps like Apple and Google et. al.
American kids really get the short end of the stick. And education gets short shrift from the states as well. I wonder what Republicans think of all this. Oh, I know. Education is a personal responsibility and parochial schools should receive more taxpayer funds.
1
I think these computer learning programs for children may be biased to more "fun" and reinforcement than they need. I learned programming in college, and the only "rewards" were that code ran, eventually, without errors; usually about 3 AM in the morning.
Learning happens in the gap between too easy and too hard. Constantly rewarding students for each "learning event" is the wrong approach. Computers should not be fun, they should be perceived as tools. Humans will compete with the help of computers, in the future, but not against them.
The children that use computers to augment their intellectual development will be richly rewarded. The kids that watch cat videos will flip burgers. Every child need to understand not only how to use computers, but to make them do tasks that they want. There is a huge difference; like learning music and not merely listening to it. Best done at a young age.
Learning happens in the gap between too easy and too hard. Constantly rewarding students for each "learning event" is the wrong approach. Computers should not be fun, they should be perceived as tools. Humans will compete with the help of computers, in the future, but not against them.
The children that use computers to augment their intellectual development will be richly rewarded. The kids that watch cat videos will flip burgers. Every child need to understand not only how to use computers, but to make them do tasks that they want. There is a huge difference; like learning music and not merely listening to it. Best done at a young age.
4
My kid goes to a Summit school, and she is getting a great education. This article and most of the comments are written by luddites. Get with the program folks. Computers are here to stay. In addition, this article does not do a complete job of researching the Summit schools. My daughter also takes art, drama, dance, and other non-tech driven classes at her school. Right now she is on a field trip with her Summit mentor group - they are at the beach.
2
Thanks for your comment, Delana. I agree that this story/quasi editorial misses a great deal.
That's great for your kid, but what about the inner city or rural kid sat in from to a computer all day and told to teach themselves because a computer is cheaper than a teacher. All these media and tech billionaires got their start somewhere with good teachers.
4
while your kids are at the beach (sunning themselves, I assume, and collecting seashells,) the real educators take their proteges to a museum or a lab.
Our public schools were originally designed to create functional Aemrican citizens ready to work in a factory. Now they want to change then to create compliant screen-heads ready to code at a startup.
And, just what type of schools do all these philanthropic techies send their kids to?
And, just what type of schools do all these philanthropic techies send their kids to?
2
Many of them go to Waldorf Schools: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silico....
2
You've got to credit good old Bill Gates. He seems to have got the ball rolling on this idea that every billionaire is an expert in education. If it's anything the country needs, it's more kids becoming even more adept at manipulating their joysticks in aspiration of futurism.
On the other hand, the Jesus on a Dinosaur crowd have an agenda unto themselves. If given a choice, I'll go with the dispensers of corporate logos in the schools over that brainwashing every time.
On the other hand, the Jesus on a Dinosaur crowd have an agenda unto themselves. If given a choice, I'll go with the dispensers of corporate logos in the schools over that brainwashing every time.
2
My view is that the hardest and the most important part of understanding something is, even in math, to read (2-dimensional) sentences well enough to be able create his/her own (often 3-d) view on the subject. These softwares cut this process and directly give kids the 3-d views, thus skip the key part of basic training. NYT articles would include much more pictures and cartoons to welcome those spoiled people, in the near future.
2
When Zuckerberg is in charge of our kids education, it shows how stupid we've all become...
3
We need to match aptitude with the current and future needs of employers then create curricula that can teach the skills needed in those jobs. There's no reason to put future Walmart "associates" through a full (pricey) K-12 including geometry and algebra if they're only going to open cartons and stock shelves.
1
Nice.
3
as a recently retired teacher it looks to me like technology driven education may be like MOOCS - which were supposed to change the world but failed because they only held the attention of a tiny specific already-educated already-working-professional audience simply seeking add-on skills
I've seen kids wrapt attention playing mathletics - a computer screen game to quickly answer arithmetic questions - and comparing their score to their friends/peers
But I've also seen kids whose attention deficit disorder has them more often throwing toys across the room - as they cannot keep their mind on anything and spend most of the time running amok and disturbing others
my experience in class agreed with colleagues is we can spend 80% of our time dealing with the problem students - meaning only 20% of our time is available for what we regards as useful meaningful teaching time.
the latest toy that seems to have captured or distracted kids' attention is the fidget spinner - https://goo.gl/9y5hcb - yesterday I watched several kids enjoying them while one ADHD kid tossed one in the air narrowly missing another kids head - those things are heavy metal !
I've seen kids wrapt attention playing mathletics - a computer screen game to quickly answer arithmetic questions - and comparing their score to their friends/peers
But I've also seen kids whose attention deficit disorder has them more often throwing toys across the room - as they cannot keep their mind on anything and spend most of the time running amok and disturbing others
my experience in class agreed with colleagues is we can spend 80% of our time dealing with the problem students - meaning only 20% of our time is available for what we regards as useful meaningful teaching time.
the latest toy that seems to have captured or distracted kids' attention is the fidget spinner - https://goo.gl/9y5hcb - yesterday I watched several kids enjoying them while one ADHD kid tossed one in the air narrowly missing another kids head - those things are heavy metal !
2
Silicon Valley companies are known for their data driven decision making. Too bad this doesn't apply to these "philanthropic" efforts in education.
In this day and age, it's hard to argue that students need to spend more time interfacing with computers - or that these "learning to learn with technology" skills are especially hard to acquire (witness a toddler's mastery of an iPad). If anything, teachers are struggling to prevail over their students' addictions to smartphones.
What students really need are teachers as role models in the fullest sense. What's better than an adult who can convey why they find a subject matter interesting and worthwhile? What's better than an adult who not only can explain difficult concepts in depth (anticipating where common misunderstandings occur) but also guide students through probing, socially-shared questioning? What's better than a caring adult who can make sure their students have the social capital they will need to navigate life? For very young children, what's better than an adult who can role model an extensive vocabulary and a predictable environment? Not enough of these teachers around? Of course not, given current teacher salaries. These CEO's should indulge in some basic calculations about after-tax teacher incomes versus costs-of-living and then focus on one guiding question: Will "my project" help attract talented individuals to the teaching profession who intend to stay in it for the long run?
In this day and age, it's hard to argue that students need to spend more time interfacing with computers - or that these "learning to learn with technology" skills are especially hard to acquire (witness a toddler's mastery of an iPad). If anything, teachers are struggling to prevail over their students' addictions to smartphones.
What students really need are teachers as role models in the fullest sense. What's better than an adult who can convey why they find a subject matter interesting and worthwhile? What's better than an adult who not only can explain difficult concepts in depth (anticipating where common misunderstandings occur) but also guide students through probing, socially-shared questioning? What's better than a caring adult who can make sure their students have the social capital they will need to navigate life? For very young children, what's better than an adult who can role model an extensive vocabulary and a predictable environment? Not enough of these teachers around? Of course not, given current teacher salaries. These CEO's should indulge in some basic calculations about after-tax teacher incomes versus costs-of-living and then focus on one guiding question: Will "my project" help attract talented individuals to the teaching profession who intend to stay in it for the long run?
5
Reed Hastings remarks: “In our society as a democracy, I think it is healthy that there is a debate about what are the goals of public education." My question for Hastings, his billionaire subsidizers, and the rest of us: why don't we premise "the goals of public education" on the curricula that the children of Hastings Zuckerberg, et.al., learn from in their--probably--private schools?
I'd ask the same of former President Obama: why stage a "Race to the Top" to set goals for public education; why couldn't the goals and methods of--say, Sidwell Friends serve as our model for public school reform? After all, we know that curriculum prepared Malia for Harvard quite well.
In other words, will Mark Zuckerberg send his children to the classrooms he and his colleagues are engineering for the masses?
If so, that'll be a breakthrough worth reporting. But the Times pulled back the curtain on that wizardry; Matt Richtel's 2011 report, "A Silicon Valley School That Doesn't Compute," suggests we're being sold a billion dollars worth of "good(s)":
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silico...
I'd ask the same of former President Obama: why stage a "Race to the Top" to set goals for public education; why couldn't the goals and methods of--say, Sidwell Friends serve as our model for public school reform? After all, we know that curriculum prepared Malia for Harvard quite well.
In other words, will Mark Zuckerberg send his children to the classrooms he and his colleagues are engineering for the masses?
If so, that'll be a breakthrough worth reporting. But the Times pulled back the curtain on that wizardry; Matt Richtel's 2011 report, "A Silicon Valley School That Doesn't Compute," suggests we're being sold a billion dollars worth of "good(s)":
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silico...
5
So, being a billionaire makes them an expert in education? They know better than a couple of thousand of years of trial and error involving millions, heck billions? More Socialist nonsense. An idea pops in their head and they think it will automagically come to fruition with a well determined outcome. Better hope the school employees have waivers signed off. You know some, if not much, of this will yield little benefits and the parents will be looking for someone to blame.
A generation is being raised which will only be able to function with electronics to tell them what to do, how to think, etc. Really very sad.
A generation is being raised which will only be able to function with electronics to tell them what to do, how to think, etc. Really very sad.
47
Mark, It's not really about what is good for the nation's children--it's really about what is good for business--theirs. Don't forget they get a nice fat tax deduction with no accountability for these *investments*.
I really don't understand people: You take federal money out of education because it's too much government, then a private company tries to help out and it's to socialist. Do you see the cognitive dissonance there?!
Reading NYT sometimes feel like reading pessimist archive, it's depressing to see human beings are so clinging to the methodologies they are used to that they reject any new ideas without even trying.
1
We're trying it. Have been for 3 years. Major issues, on multiple levels. I'm not sure to which comments you refer, but most have been from parents and teachers with actual experience.
1
Bill Gates had the right idea when the Gates Foundation was content to provide mosquito nets in malaria ravaged countries. With all the human needs in this world crying for help, why do they have to mess with our kids? Because they know they'll buy more of their junk than those kids in the rain forests when they grow up?
65
In the graveyard of technology interventions designed to reform public education lies a tombstone reading "One size fits all."
2
They are children, not "beta testers."
9
Technology should supplement rather than replace good teaching, critical thinking, and interactive learning. How many of these billionaires have ever actually taught kids? My teaching experience began 75 years ago when my teachers made me teach small groups of other children in order to keep me out of their hair. It was hard to begin with,but these kids learned,as did the rest of my students for many decades thereafter.
5
Sounds fine to me as long as they keep the traditional options open.
I personally get much better results from self paced study than learning from traditional school environment. I'm usually much happier, challenged, and efficient learning from online courses on sites like coursera. The interactive, frequently tested and small blocked nature of online courses keep me focused much better. In online classes, fast students would no longer feel bored and slow students can go through the course materials again and again, creating a more equal environment for everybody. In this era of automation, we need citizens who are lifelong learners, which means it's only beneficial to train them the self teaching skills from early on.
I believe the more options for the students the better, if these tech giants created some new method, even to benefit just a few students like me, it's totally worth it, as long as they don't take away the existing methods.
I personally get much better results from self paced study than learning from traditional school environment. I'm usually much happier, challenged, and efficient learning from online courses on sites like coursera. The interactive, frequently tested and small blocked nature of online courses keep me focused much better. In online classes, fast students would no longer feel bored and slow students can go through the course materials again and again, creating a more equal environment for everybody. In this era of automation, we need citizens who are lifelong learners, which means it's only beneficial to train them the self teaching skills from early on.
I believe the more options for the students the better, if these tech giants created some new method, even to benefit just a few students like me, it's totally worth it, as long as they don't take away the existing methods.
1
There is a Waldorf school in Silicon Valley that does not allow students to use computers until after the 8th grade. Guess who sends their kids to that school? Employees who work at technology companies in the area. Educational technology has been vastly oversold to administrators who know little about teaching and learning, but who are under constant pressure to raise achievement scores in their districts. As the article states, there is little, if any, research that suggests technology benefits learning. These guys know nothing about education -- they're looking to make money. Period.
30
This is true. A good 1/3 of my kid's Waldorf classmates have parents working as Online charter CEOs, robotics engineers, or tech sales. These are kids, people- not ties made in China!
5
It's probably because most people who live in that area work for tech companies... a few of them chose this school doesn't mean this choice is representative.
Probably will work out well for the most part, as long as SEPARATION from Church is honored.
4
If a university researcher tried to do this they'd be buried under mountains of IRB paperwork.
5
The dumbing down continues . . .
11
Happily handing over our nation's greatest natural resource, our children's minds, to very wealthy, tech industry giants is highly questionable.
Yes, the mind is a terrible thing to waste. Don't allow this to happen further.
Tell your local school board no. Don't let these companies think you need them for anything, especially their shiny gadgets. Older BoE members think we need this garbage in our schools. We do not. Just say no, to Google,
to Gates/Microsoft, to Zuckerberg, ALL of them.
Yes, the mind is a terrible thing to waste. Don't allow this to happen further.
Tell your local school board no. Don't let these companies think you need them for anything, especially their shiny gadgets. Older BoE members think we need this garbage in our schools. We do not. Just say no, to Google,
to Gates/Microsoft, to Zuckerberg, ALL of them.
16
Let me know when you have successfully re-entered the 19th century.
1
get the kids early - you know ?
like the McDonalds' Happy Meal - kids want those - why ? I've read they don't really like the food - they just want the toy !
So parents - dealing with kids clamoring for a Happy Meal - go 'you wanna eat at McDonalds ? Oh - OK - I guess we can all eat there' - see how that works ?
like the McDonalds' Happy Meal - kids want those - why ? I've read they don't really like the food - they just want the toy !
So parents - dealing with kids clamoring for a Happy Meal - go 'you wanna eat at McDonalds ? Oh - OK - I guess we can all eat there' - see how that works ?
Do you think that our technological progress has rendered the basic needs of human beings any different than they were a couple of hundred or even a couple of thousand years ago? The value of the student-teacher relationship to human development goes back further than antiquity and is not found in test scores.
Humans developed social and emotional ties between each other for survival. We don't exactly live in a virtual world, and until we do, technology will not be the key to human development. You need only look around for your average young internet and/or cell phone addict to see how well technology alone works in developing whole and grounded humans.
Humans developed social and emotional ties between each other for survival. We don't exactly live in a virtual world, and until we do, technology will not be the key to human development. You need only look around for your average young internet and/or cell phone addict to see how well technology alone works in developing whole and grounded humans.
1
Excuse me, what do these guys know about anything?
12
Ironically, the 3 billionaires mentioned run companies that use borrowed, basic software. Salesforce is a glorified front-end for a database, versions of which have been kicking around since the 1990s. Facebook arranges users into sets and feeds them popular posts, which was ripped off from several apps. Netflix parses user purchases to detect preferences, which Amazon did long before. All 3 used access to capital to their advantage.
If they acted like capitalists, the billionaires wouldn't each be inventing their own wheel. Instead theay'd scout the landscape. Other nations perform far better than the US, and some districts throughout the US are far suprior to most. Zuckerberg visited his neighborhood charter and fell in love. He's got no idea how common, unusual, advanced, superficial, cross-cultural, its curriculum is. I guess after throwing $100 million at Newark he wanted a change. But Zuckerberg started Facebook by stealing top-ranked competition ideas, like Jobs started Apple, Uber (which ripped off Lyft) and so on. Some ideas are just better, and many billionaires get rich by stealing them.
When billionaires visit Finland and Singapore to look at schools, when they visit outlier districts in rural Minnesota and urban South Carolina, then claim to have an idea that's really an inflated version of what they saw ...then they'll be doing something important.
If they acted like capitalists, the billionaires wouldn't each be inventing their own wheel. Instead theay'd scout the landscape. Other nations perform far better than the US, and some districts throughout the US are far suprior to most. Zuckerberg visited his neighborhood charter and fell in love. He's got no idea how common, unusual, advanced, superficial, cross-cultural, its curriculum is. I guess after throwing $100 million at Newark he wanted a change. But Zuckerberg started Facebook by stealing top-ranked competition ideas, like Jobs started Apple, Uber (which ripped off Lyft) and so on. Some ideas are just better, and many billionaires get rich by stealing them.
When billionaires visit Finland and Singapore to look at schools, when they visit outlier districts in rural Minnesota and urban South Carolina, then claim to have an idea that's really an inflated version of what they saw ...then they'll be doing something important.
8
These efforts, tainted as they may be,on balance are neutralizing the highly successful Right-Wing offensive to indoctrinate high school(and earlier) students into the evils of government and the inherent goodness of gods and capitalism.
Check out your school's requirements for "Free Enterprise Education," how it became law in your state, and what alternatives may be available.
They are our children, trained to act as Trump drones. Death to the EPA! Death to health care. Death to consumer protection. Death to workplace safety......
Check out your school's requirements for "Free Enterprise Education," how it became law in your state, and what alternatives may be available.
They are our children, trained to act as Trump drones. Death to the EPA! Death to health care. Death to consumer protection. Death to workplace safety......
4
Back when I was growing up, we called these vocational schools.
16
High schools had college ed. courses starting in the Junior year. They also had courses which directed some students to auto mechanics, or physical ed classes. As I recall, those students whose family had some money enrolled in college ed. classes, because they knew they would be able to go to college. There were exceptions with some incredibly bright kids who went to college on scholarships. It was not a fair system in most small towns; it was socially stratified. When public schools deteriorated in large cities, parents began to send their children to private schools. School is a socializing process; we need to pay attention to how that is accomplished. Give all kids a chance at the best, and support those who will succeed in a vocation. I have no interest in Google or Facebook et al dictating public school education, no matter how much money or equipment they donate. Their kids will not be attending any public schools. IT learning can be accomplished the same way mathematics or English grammar is accomplished. Good well paid teachers and enough equipment for students to access.
I'd feel more comfortable if there were full disclosure of where these tech giants send their kids to school and what their student/teacher ratios may be.
9
''Now children, log into your Face Book accounts to do our assignments for today'', are words I hope we will never hear in classrooms anywhere, ever.
13
The bigger education challenge is how to divorce children from technology, the source of a lot of alienation and addiction in modern life.
9
As a high school student, I find some of the ideas in this article promising. However, some of the ideas are simply ridiculous. The few topics that we are assigned to learn ourselves in school, are the few topics that I don't understand. Just recently, my physics teacher did not meet with his classes for a week due to his daughter's college graduation. My classmates and I had to teach ourselves the laws of lenses and refraction in lenses. We were thoroughly confused because none of us have learned anything similar. Eventually, one student (who only understood the topic moderately better than I did) explained his basic knowledge of the subject. Frustrated and confused, our class had many questions when my teacher returned.Keeping in mind that my school has ample access to technology, seeing as we live in a wealthier section of northern New Jersey, I don't find it effective to have students teach themselves. I hope that this is not the future that I am heading down in the rest of my high school career.
16
There was no substitute teacher? That's strange.
2
Sounds a bit like homeschooling...the very thing billionaires despise.
My son is in an advanced silicon driven NYC experimental public school and know that they still "teach to test"; aka that means curriculum that ensures students pass the NY State Regents. No uptick on Regents and no funding; Really simple metric and motivation. They've adapted Google and several other tech that is really meh, but saves money to allocate elsewhere.
3
I work in a county public school in Maryland. Over the years I have watched the introduction of technology ruin the ability of students to focus. Their attention spans are considerably shorter and when asked to perform critical thinking tasks, the average student does not wish to engage. Math games are just that to most students-games. They are absorbed by the characters, colors, and motion on the screen, rarely paying attention to concepts. A good math teacher cannot be replaced by games. Those students who are above average see these games as time wasters and entertainment while they watch the average students goof off. Below average students love it when the computers come out. They do not engage in the assignment at all, preferring to try to get on the Internet where they visit NFL or music sites. Stop thinking technology will solve our crisis in education. Indeed, it is a huge part of the problem.
20
yesterday I read an article about how Gen-Z shop - compared to Millennials who loved Facebook, Gen-Z is all about the mobile phone number - just let them give you that - deal done !
they consider themselves great multitaskers - the other day I was pointing out explaining some dangerous equipment to one young guy - and while I was talking to him he was texting on his small screen ! - I asked 'are you getting this?' - he mumbled 'yeah' while continuing to thumb his phone ! - I'm guessing he forgot what I said immediately.
they consider themselves empowered consumers - anything they don't like, they simply move on - short attention spans - the internet is an infinite world of worm holes to explore - the egocentric nature of push-communications from your device means you can feel Emperor in control of your tiny universe
so now young kids can see themselves as empowered consumers - aware and ready to complain about a teacher at the first sign of anything they don't 'Like'
they consider themselves great multitaskers - the other day I was pointing out explaining some dangerous equipment to one young guy - and while I was talking to him he was texting on his small screen ! - I asked 'are you getting this?' - he mumbled 'yeah' while continuing to thumb his phone ! - I'm guessing he forgot what I said immediately.
they consider themselves empowered consumers - anything they don't like, they simply move on - short attention spans - the internet is an infinite world of worm holes to explore - the egocentric nature of push-communications from your device means you can feel Emperor in control of your tiny universe
so now young kids can see themselves as empowered consumers - aware and ready to complain about a teacher at the first sign of anything they don't 'Like'
2
As a Montessori student and practitioner for 40 years I learned to observe how children learn, how resilience is achieved with responsibility and self direction; how social interaction of multiple ages is more productive than smaller classes of one age group. I am thrilled that the revolution of artificial intelligence is being brought and used in education. We know so little scientifically about how children learn.
2
Montessori schools were a financial scam from the first day. I had a friend who sent her two children to Montessori schools; they became unruly and rarely concentrated for very long. She put them in a more traditional private school; they did very well, and went on to university.
1
If a child emerges from a Montessori school without self discipline and good concentration the Montessori school was not run with her philosophy, materials, internship and understanding. It is true that reaching the goals of running a multi age group of self directed children takes great ability, training and commitment. As a teacher trainer I saw many different schools, administrators and teachers. The requirement for teachers to do internships, the communication that continues with training centers and the practicing teacher and the voluntary groups formed by committed teachers that we have in the NJ/NY areas keeps me hopeful for future improvement in good teacher training. The human person leading learning can use technology and guide the children how to use it but they must understand the curriculum and know the child even better.
3
I'm all for philanthropy and respect what all of these billionaires are doing for American public schools and their students. But in this era of fake news, I hope that they will extend their philanthropic focus beyond STEM to Civics and History. As a college history professor, I am consistently dismayed by how much my students don't know about their own country's history or they way our republic functions. I fear that this will only get worse as the current Administration continues to make statements and decisions that threaten the very foundation of our republic, especially when basic knowledge of that foundation is shaky at best for too many young Americans.
11
Those against this new approach to urban education refuse to face the fact that lots of money alone poured into a public school district hasn't worked. The examples of Newark, Trenton and Camden NJ include $30,000 per pupil spent with almost no change in test scores or graduation rates! It is time to try something else!
4
Like Zuckerberg and Corey Booker tried in New Jersey?
5
Like maybe disconnect phones and social media.
1
Like maybe taking into account the socio-economic background of the students. More tutors, more mentors, more teachers trained to teach in that environment. What a waste of young people who become an experiment for Zuckerberg. They are not Beta widgets. How about endowing really good libraries with really good books?
1
"That is how Summit’s platform came to show students every lesson they will need to complete for the year. They may tackle lessons in any order. At the end of each unit, they take a 10-question multiple-choice test."
The rest of the article aside, this is pretty much a recipe for nothing making it into a student's long-term memory.
The rest of the article aside, this is pretty much a recipe for nothing making it into a student's long-term memory.
10
reminds me of 'cheaper' self-paced computer courses - pay your money upfront, attend when you like, complete one section after another, infinite retries but you can't proceed until you complete, certificate at the end, we promise to get you a job when you complete (in our 2 week job factory)
what happened ? humans are social animals, and tend to be unable to sit alone for hundreds of hours doing intensive learning staring at a screen - so stop attending
what happened to the business ? oh - here's your certificate of attendance -
thanks for coming - you didn't complete ? - we have no record of that - all our completed students have gotten a job !
what happened ? humans are social animals, and tend to be unable to sit alone for hundreds of hours doing intensive learning staring at a screen - so stop attending
what happened to the business ? oh - here's your certificate of attendance -
thanks for coming - you didn't complete ? - we have no record of that - all our completed students have gotten a job !
1
Didn't Warren Buffet claim in his interview with David Rubenstein that smartphones are too smart for him, he uses no computer at work, and only uses a PC when at home to search the web? Seems hard to pick suitable role models these days.
9
I suppose that the incorrect use of the phrase, "It can be a steep learning curve," near the bottom, tells us a lot.
For those unclear on this (and it seems as if everyone is), if you plot knowledge on the Y axis against time on the X axis, it should be clear that a steep learning curve is desirable, as it indicates knowledge acquired quickly. A steep sloped learning curve indicates that the topic is learned easily.
For those unclear on this (and it seems as if everyone is), if you plot knowledge on the Y axis against time on the X axis, it should be clear that a steep learning curve is desirable, as it indicates knowledge acquired quickly. A steep sloped learning curve indicates that the topic is learned easily.
6
There is zero that is new in this article, and its frankly silly and shouldn't have been published because its not newsworthy and doesn't depict a trend. These techniques have been used for 15 years now. They were pioneered by many small start up companies, not owned or funded by billionaires. Dreambox is a small, financially struggling company and is not that influential. I also fail to see the problem if Mr. Benioff gives millions to San Francisco and they hire math teachers to reduce the class size, or have better libraries for their kids. If Facebook develops something helpful, then educators will use it, if it doesn't they will soon drop it. How about articles on groundbreaking and teachers and schools and why they are successful and what tools and techniques they use?
5
I was the CEO and co-founder of DreamBox Learning (the same one that sold it to Reed). At the time, I believed that the interactive Web could augment school-based math in the home (think fun, meaningful practice with Amazon-like personalization). After of the acquisition of DreamBox, the focus shifted to selling it to schools, which is a much more complex/weighty effort (see e.g., the Harvard study, which leaves one wondering if it is up to the task).
Nonetheless, my belief remains that the core of early learning necessitates human-to-human interaction & feedback -- it's primal, coded into our DNA.
Nonetheless, my belief remains that the core of early learning necessitates human-to-human interaction & feedback -- it's primal, coded into our DNA.
18
totally - I observe kids in childcare - the ones running around alone causing trouble tend to be not learning anything new - the ones who sit together and talk and help show each other new skills - tend to be the rapid learners
plus - nobody wants to work with the rude and nasty arrogant asocial geek - but everybody wants to work with the affable warm friendly empathic helpful kind considerate person
so I reckon emotional intelligence - learned in a social context - is much more useful in ensuring a stable career and life trajectory for most people
of course the exceptions may be the rare geeks who do indeed change the world - George Lucas, Steve Jobs - but as an ex-programmer I reckon people who want to learn about computers are no more than 10% of the population, and people who want to learn coding are no more than 10% of those, so say 1% of the population are suited to learning coding.
So mass education should not be pushing coding for everyone - rather as you say helping to encourage and develop 'human-to-human interaction & feedback -- it's primal, coded into our DNA'
plus - nobody wants to work with the rude and nasty arrogant asocial geek - but everybody wants to work with the affable warm friendly empathic helpful kind considerate person
so I reckon emotional intelligence - learned in a social context - is much more useful in ensuring a stable career and life trajectory for most people
of course the exceptions may be the rare geeks who do indeed change the world - George Lucas, Steve Jobs - but as an ex-programmer I reckon people who want to learn about computers are no more than 10% of the population, and people who want to learn coding are no more than 10% of those, so say 1% of the population are suited to learning coding.
So mass education should not be pushing coding for everyone - rather as you say helping to encourage and develop 'human-to-human interaction & feedback -- it's primal, coded into our DNA'
You are not a philanthropist if you have strings attached to the money you give.
Having said that, I am all for injection of any capital or ideas into public school systems where all kids of any background have exactly the same opportunities for advancement and knowledge.
Aye, but that is a big caveat, but anything else is the equivalent of a free coke machine in the school hallway. You are getting something for free, but there is still a profit motive that drains resources that may be used more wisely. ( such as juice instead of sugar water )
Having said that, I am all for injection of any capital or ideas into public school systems where all kids of any background have exactly the same opportunities for advancement and knowledge.
Aye, but that is a big caveat, but anything else is the equivalent of a free coke machine in the school hallway. You are getting something for free, but there is still a profit motive that drains resources that may be used more wisely. ( such as juice instead of sugar water )
7
It's poison. It's strings attached. It's unsustainable. It's un-democratic. Yep, sounds like a perfect fit for public schools.
11
Nothing new here. Carnegie did the same thing for Libraries a hundred years ago and many of our private and public colleges where built outright and funded by the robber barons of the day.
4
The joke is that where these IT folks live/work are either 1. Childless - look at how few families actually live in SF. 2. So wealthy that no one attends public schools. Either way; this is PR feel good for them and no actual benefits to real CA kids.
10
I'll believe all this, if Zuckerberg sends HIS kids to public school.
hahahahahaha....
hahahahahaha....
Hubris. Just because Hastings, Zuckerberg, and the rest had interesting and successful ideas in social media doesn't make them omnicompetent. What distresses me most is their arrogant assumption that they can disregard accepted standards of education research and simply 'try stuff out on kids.'
If any of these guys had a background in biology, chemistry or medicine and came up with an idea about treatment for a disease, would they be able to circumvent approved standards of testing for efficacy and side effects? Could they experiment on subjects without their informed consent? Why should a child's education be any different?
If any of these guys had a background in biology, chemistry or medicine and came up with an idea about treatment for a disease, would they be able to circumvent approved standards of testing for efficacy and side effects? Could they experiment on subjects without their informed consent? Why should a child's education be any different?
16
What do you expect? We have billions of humans who can't pull themselves away from their hand held devices to have any real encounter with the world around them, and these tech billionaires are now saying:
"We got you and we now want your children".
I see mothers on the bus with infants in their laps surfing their phones showing their babies these images on screens when they should know that this activity will not assist in the brain development of their little ones. Playing paddy-cake will. Real human interaction is at stake and now it's moving into the classrooms. Perhaps it's the educators fault. We took out arts programs and kids don't know what an orchestra is nor do they really know what a melody sounds like. (Ever listen to the stuff they pass off as music today? It's all digitized. From the creation of it to its conveyance). So that void of taking art classes out of the public schools, be it painting, poetry writing, music appreciation, is now filled with a scary replacement.
Educators: don't be lured by this tech money. It's a seduction for the mind and soul of your child. An they wish to be in charge of that, make no mistake. The idea is to have AI in control of the human and not the other way 'round. I wish I were joking.
"We got you and we now want your children".
I see mothers on the bus with infants in their laps surfing their phones showing their babies these images on screens when they should know that this activity will not assist in the brain development of their little ones. Playing paddy-cake will. Real human interaction is at stake and now it's moving into the classrooms. Perhaps it's the educators fault. We took out arts programs and kids don't know what an orchestra is nor do they really know what a melody sounds like. (Ever listen to the stuff they pass off as music today? It's all digitized. From the creation of it to its conveyance). So that void of taking art classes out of the public schools, be it painting, poetry writing, music appreciation, is now filled with a scary replacement.
Educators: don't be lured by this tech money. It's a seduction for the mind and soul of your child. An they wish to be in charge of that, make no mistake. The idea is to have AI in control of the human and not the other way 'round. I wish I were joking.
20
This is the result of the demonization of government and the deification of business. Our government has been hollowed out and there is no regard for the common good so the rich--of any political stripe--take over.
Plutocracy in action.
Plutocracy in action.
9
As we allow billionaires try out their "ideas" on our kids by yoking them to machines and algerthisn that think for them we are dooming t3' to a world in which they cannot think for themselves. When the technology flavor of the day or year moves on an entire generation is withotunthe ability to adapt because they can't disengage from the box.
We must encourage the reading of books and the working of math problems not the playing of mind numbing games. I'd rather billionaires pay their taxes.
In case you are wondering how turning our kids over to "business men" can turn out, look no farther than Washington DC. I rest my case.
We must encourage the reading of books and the working of math problems not the playing of mind numbing games. I'd rather billionaires pay their taxes.
In case you are wondering how turning our kids over to "business men" can turn out, look no farther than Washington DC. I rest my case.
Facebook, whose CEO's hubris and hatred for privacy need no introduction, and Netflix, the so-called "rebels" who have managed to both bumble mail-order and internet show delivery (remember Qwikster?) AND help break Web standards with DRM by supporting the hideous EME, are both involved.
That's enough reason to be terrified. Your kids are their target, and good luck opting out of their creepiness (to say nothing of Apple's or Google's).
Please stop calling such arrogant marketers "tech giants". It overrepresents tech's role in this, and insults actual programmers by comparing them to those crooks.
That's enough reason to be terrified. Your kids are their target, and good luck opting out of their creepiness (to say nothing of Apple's or Google's).
Please stop calling such arrogant marketers "tech giants". It overrepresents tech's role in this, and insults actual programmers by comparing them to those crooks.
7
I would ask Mr. Zuckerberg how well the Newark school system did when millions of dollars were thrown at it.
8
A conversation about computers in schools is misplaced. We should be talking money here.
If our schools aren't working, it's not because the teachers aren't creative or acting like "startups." It's because we continually siphon money away from them. We don't pay our teachers enough, we cut education spending, and in California, we have Prop 13 to further reduce local budgets for education. And then more drain, with families investing their financial and social capital in private schools, charter schools and other alternatives, when the public schools begin to show the signs of starvation.
How can schools thrive, let alone survive, under these conditions? We shouldn't have to rely on Zuckerberg or Benioff to swoop in here as heroes with their big balls of cash. Instead, we should be pouring money into our schools in the first place. Instead, the schools suffer for the same reason that these tech dudes have so much to "donate": our system continually favors the rich, and on consolidating assets and wealth among a concentrated few, rather than building and investing in our fundamental infrastructure, which includes our kids.
I am disgusted to read articles that glorify wealthy CEO philanthropists and successful business folks "dabbling" in issues outside their areas of expertise with money that should be in the hands of local agencies and schools. Praising their efforts to "innovate" is like praising a thief for handing back an empty wallet.
If our schools aren't working, it's not because the teachers aren't creative or acting like "startups." It's because we continually siphon money away from them. We don't pay our teachers enough, we cut education spending, and in California, we have Prop 13 to further reduce local budgets for education. And then more drain, with families investing their financial and social capital in private schools, charter schools and other alternatives, when the public schools begin to show the signs of starvation.
How can schools thrive, let alone survive, under these conditions? We shouldn't have to rely on Zuckerberg or Benioff to swoop in here as heroes with their big balls of cash. Instead, we should be pouring money into our schools in the first place. Instead, the schools suffer for the same reason that these tech dudes have so much to "donate": our system continually favors the rich, and on consolidating assets and wealth among a concentrated few, rather than building and investing in our fundamental infrastructure, which includes our kids.
I am disgusted to read articles that glorify wealthy CEO philanthropists and successful business folks "dabbling" in issues outside their areas of expertise with money that should be in the hands of local agencies and schools. Praising their efforts to "innovate" is like praising a thief for handing back an empty wallet.
8
the short-attention span of voters leaves the political field open to manipulation by the continuing-attention of paid lobbyists for big corporations and fossil fuel billionaires - who don't care about you - at all, at all, at all (as George Carlin said) - and only want tax cuts to put more money into their next 600 foot superyacht
so while politicians mainly feel pressure for tax cuts from political donors (Australia is currently investigating paid political bribes from China) they are only going to do what helps them keep their job and their future income - yes sir, as an ex-politician would you like a high paid stipend as a 'consultant advisor' ? - just come this way ...
so while politicians mainly feel pressure for tax cuts from political donors (Australia is currently investigating paid political bribes from China) they are only going to do what helps them keep their job and their future income - yes sir, as an ex-politician would you like a high paid stipend as a 'consultant advisor' ? - just come this way ...
Oh, another way to mine humanity for drone jobs in the military-industrial-Facebook complex. After all, if we don't allow this "disruption"', we will get crushed because we don't have enough coders. This is a Faustian Bargain, and it's not going to go well for the "human." Thanks to the New York Times for such thorough coverage. Anyone who thinks there's not some pre constructed utopia being engineered as we sit around clucking about it should read Dave Eggar's The Circle. Be assured all of Silicon Valley has.
5
Yes, by all means, let's have a bunch of childless dropout IT billionaires experiment with other peoples' children. They've got nothing but good intentions, right? Sales? Surely you jest!
What could possibly go wrong?
What could possibly go wrong?
10
In the 1990s Chris Whittle piped Channel One, commercially sponsored TV into schools, for profit.
New era, new tech, new bigshots bypassing educators to inculcate youngsters with their brands and monetize education.
New toys are so dazzling.
New era, new tech, new bigshots bypassing educators to inculcate youngsters with their brands and monetize education.
New toys are so dazzling.
9
I work in the public school system in a high poverty community where the majority of my students live in deep poverty. Many live without water and many live in single parent homes, Their lives are anything but easy. Based on years of experience, I can guarantee you that the education system of the rich imposed on the poor, or even the middle class will not work. We have students who can google their way around the internet. We have students who are very proficient in social media (it causes countless fights), and we have students who know every app known for and about social media. Our students are not dumb. What they need is an education that means something to them and sitting behind a computer every single day is not what they need. Not now. Not ever. Students need meaningful interaction and rigorous classwork, not a mindless computer that adapts to them. Furthermore, most students lack the self discipline to sit behind a computer and finish anything. It is these oligarchs intention to provide monitors? Our students need to be challenged and our teachers and counselors need to make a fair and living wage. Making $50,000.00 a year to sacrifice pretty much one's entire life to teach or counsel is a lot to ask of anyone. These rich fools would do better to spend one year, yes a year, shadow teaching or shadow counseling and learn what is really going on in American classrooms before they pompously and arrogantly impose their agenda on others.
271
Brilliantly stated. Thank you so much for your words of wisdom.
8
I couldn't agree more. Obviously, computers have become the cereal box siren to education administrators, while the technology industry creates a future consumers' market!
6
years ago a Gary Larson cartoon showed doting parents gazing at their young boy spending all his time in his room playing computer games - like 'ah - he'll get a $100k a year job playing computer games'
that was a joke then - now - I'm increasing reading of military personnel sitting in the US - guiding drone strikes in the Middle East - with joysticks - using the skills they developed playing computer games - the other day I saw a camouflage guy controlling a robot maybe-bomb disarmer saying controlling it was 'just like a computer game'
so there you are - the skills learned from computer games are already enabling us to kill people with remote controls - and be home in time for dinner with the family - and go to church on Sunday.
that was a joke then - now - I'm increasing reading of military personnel sitting in the US - guiding drone strikes in the Middle East - with joysticks - using the skills they developed playing computer games - the other day I saw a camouflage guy controlling a robot maybe-bomb disarmer saying controlling it was 'just like a computer game'
so there you are - the skills learned from computer games are already enabling us to kill people with remote controls - and be home in time for dinner with the family - and go to church on Sunday.
It shouldn’t be surprising that big business wants to create a workforce that reflects its values and ideals. The best place to instill these is in the classroom, but there are significant drawbacks with this approach. Education going back to the ancient Greeks has been about exploring and testing out new ideas, promoting creative thinking, and fostering those qualities that make each student unique.
Adopting an “engineering approach” breeds technicians. Silicon valley billionaires are effectively breeding a narrow-minded class of specialists who are never exposed to the world’s great literature, art, ideas, and humanitarian disciplines.
That the humanities and the arts has become devalued to the point of non-existence is reflected in the emphasis on STEM programs, and the promotion of careers in technology. This emphasis on numbers is so overwhelming that one wonders if these billionaire techies are simply trying to create an obedient, non-thinking, work force with no time to reflect. It is no longer a matter of whether a human being has the strength to dare question the purpose and direction of his or her life. At the rate we're going, rising generations will have no idea that such a question exists.
This may be all well and good for some people and their masters, but there is more to life than zeros and ones. What we are seeing now in education is anti-human and far from removed from the ideals of freedom and creativity that the liberal arts fostered.
Adopting an “engineering approach” breeds technicians. Silicon valley billionaires are effectively breeding a narrow-minded class of specialists who are never exposed to the world’s great literature, art, ideas, and humanitarian disciplines.
That the humanities and the arts has become devalued to the point of non-existence is reflected in the emphasis on STEM programs, and the promotion of careers in technology. This emphasis on numbers is so overwhelming that one wonders if these billionaire techies are simply trying to create an obedient, non-thinking, work force with no time to reflect. It is no longer a matter of whether a human being has the strength to dare question the purpose and direction of his or her life. At the rate we're going, rising generations will have no idea that such a question exists.
This may be all well and good for some people and their masters, but there is more to life than zeros and ones. What we are seeing now in education is anti-human and far from removed from the ideals of freedom and creativity that the liberal arts fostered.
8
"Adopting an “engineering approach” breeds technicians" - I disagree, most probably with your idea of what an "engineering approach" is.
An engineering approach breeds creative problem solvers - people who can visualize and articulate a goal, identify constraints, and create a plan to solve the problem with tests to show that the solution is viable and works.
These are skills that are absolutely transferable and useful anywhere.
And yes, I have an engineering background that I have transferred to another field.
An engineering approach breeds creative problem solvers - people who can visualize and articulate a goal, identify constraints, and create a plan to solve the problem with tests to show that the solution is viable and works.
These are skills that are absolutely transferable and useful anywhere.
And yes, I have an engineering background that I have transferred to another field.
I thought that by now most people would have realized that our education system is failing us.Cheaper wages are not the only reason why our jobs are moving overseas. There is an enormous gulf between the skills available and the skills needed. It is not so much as we have fallen behind as other countries have caught up with us. And our education system is responsible in large part for his
One can argue whether, it is the school that is incapable of teaching a competent curriculum, or, the student who does not see education as key to a successful future. IMHO It's a lot of both. Add clueless parents to the mix and you have the recipe for our current disaster that goes in the name of education.
In order for things to change we need competent, highly trained (and highly paid) teachers, motivated students and parents who understand that their responsibility does not begin and end with dropping off the child at school.
I invite the reader to google the top 10 high schools in the country. .https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/national-rankings. In the top 7 there are 5 charter schools of the same company called BASIS. Started with the help of another tech entrepreneur, Craig Barret, the ex-CEO of Intel, these guys have done amazing work in the last 5 years or so. When I first came to Arizona 20 years ago, we were ranked 48th in the country. I am amazed that none of these schools found a mention in this article.
One can argue whether, it is the school that is incapable of teaching a competent curriculum, or, the student who does not see education as key to a successful future. IMHO It's a lot of both. Add clueless parents to the mix and you have the recipe for our current disaster that goes in the name of education.
In order for things to change we need competent, highly trained (and highly paid) teachers, motivated students and parents who understand that their responsibility does not begin and end with dropping off the child at school.
I invite the reader to google the top 10 high schools in the country. .https://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/national-rankings. In the top 7 there are 5 charter schools of the same company called BASIS. Started with the help of another tech entrepreneur, Craig Barret, the ex-CEO of Intel, these guys have done amazing work in the last 5 years or so. When I first came to Arizona 20 years ago, we were ranked 48th in the country. I am amazed that none of these schools found a mention in this article.
I'm amazed that anyone trusts usnews rankings.
5
Selling computers to schools - "a lucrative market".
Once gadgets are sold to schools, taking funds that might fund extra teachers. Whether they raise test scores is irrelevant to the company that sold the equipment.
There are benefits for probably already high functioning students.
For students I taught in NYC public schools, from backgrounds of chronic deprivation and neglect, with chronic absenteeism (40 percent of students in some inner city elementary schools miss a month or more of school),a laptop is not the answer. No keyboard or software can counter effects of parental incarceration or drug involvement or worse.
I've come to suspect that much of the attack on public education is designed to profit corporations and allow wealthy parents to get vouchers for the private schools they send their children to.
Once gadgets are sold to schools, taking funds that might fund extra teachers. Whether they raise test scores is irrelevant to the company that sold the equipment.
There are benefits for probably already high functioning students.
For students I taught in NYC public schools, from backgrounds of chronic deprivation and neglect, with chronic absenteeism (40 percent of students in some inner city elementary schools miss a month or more of school),a laptop is not the answer. No keyboard or software can counter effects of parental incarceration or drug involvement or worse.
I've come to suspect that much of the attack on public education is designed to profit corporations and allow wealthy parents to get vouchers for the private schools they send their children to.
7
Public schools are failing the kids. For 2016, NYS reports less than 40% of its kids are proficient in math and ELA or another way to put it: more than 60% aren't proficient. We need to try new ways of learning at lower costs. Keep making donations to try to make the system better. These tech billionaires are the new progressives and not the unions and political parties (both Democrat and Republican) of yesteryear.
1
But they don't know jack about education. All they know about is making money and excuse me but facebook looks alot like DUMB LUCK?
6
The boss and his wife (the Zuckerbergs) own and run a school, however I would like to gently add that it's not a good idea to put the cart before the horse. I did that twice and it's humiliating.
In the late 70s, the principal of the jr high school I taught in,delivered a donated computer to my small reading room. It was the first I had ever seen. I had no clue how to use it. He then delivered to me a 12 yr old,new student,from CT, who was very bright and an underachiever. His name was Brad Heinz. Brad knew how to use a computer.; he taught me how to program in BASIC. Brad and that computer changed my life. Other than a love of reading, I had never found a subject I really fell head over heels for before. I continued to learn, took classes, and eventually became a computer teacher. Every child,in every classroom should have a computer/iPad. I have been saying that for many years. A couple years after I retired in 2007, the school system I taught in did away with computer classes in the middle school. Sad. Kids are so much more tech ready than many teachers. BASIC programming et al changed my thinking process. Kahn Academy has improved my ability to code. Children are capable of being in charge of their learning with teachers guidance,monitoring and assistance. Set them free from the boring,ancient teaching methods! Brad got busted in high school for hacking into the computer system. He was banned from using computers. What a waste of a wonderful mind. They should have learned from him. Thank you Brad,wherever you are!
32
I had a similar experience with a tape-playing Commodore computer in my 6th-Grade supply room. I learned a few basic commands and, wow, a whole new symbolic world opened up. This is the type of learning that is amazing. However, a new app in the classroom just absolves the teacher from doing much more than demonstrating and applying. It takes away time from critical thought and replaces it with "how-to-apply" modes of thinking. It's a great tool, but it should be relegated to the supply closet and only brought out as the exception.
Your example of what happened to Brad speaks for itself. Being brilliant at computing was not enough to make Brad a contributing member of your school's student body. Anyway, there's a difference between learning everything about computers and learning everything from a computer; there are some things computers just can't teach. If the only way to make learning "interesting" is to put it on a computer screen, we are worse off than I thought.
I did not think I said that everything could be learned from a computer. Teachers are very important in the process. The teacher presents a whole class lesson and then the students work on tasks the computer presents to them.What computers do is allow learning to be individualized so that students in heterogenous classes can learn at their own pace. You can't just give a child a computer and then say learn! As for Brad, what he did was wrong but his ability to right that wrong should have been utilized.
they are the math gods, that's who... from a world where everthing is black or white, no gray, no creativity, no exploration....and always just one correct answer to any question worth posing., something you can't argue with, like a number.
but that's not how kids are.
but that's not how kids are.
2
Pottree, that's an "interesting" observation. I'm not sure what level of education you have that leads you to believe that our high tech billionaires are 1) math gods, (2) have binary answers and / or (3) have no imagination.
2
Mathematics is not as you have implied. There is plenty of exploration, a slew of correct answers and approaches, and many provocative grays. Were it that schools taught math and not simply some version of R'thmetic.
Iwould like to know where these Silicon Valley people send their children to school. As I recall they send their children to private schools with high teacher to children ratios. In fact, they prefer human to human instruction for their children. Why is that?
7
This is how wealthy people that have a true sense of service and selflessness act, unlike those like the Trump Family and Betsy DeVos.
2
Hmmmm...a bunch of really intelligent guys that didn't need to go to school to learn, trying to educate students that really do need some type of new engagement from both better teachers, better digital presentation, and better methods. Should be interesting to see if these guys get results. I have a feeling the real innovation in education will not be coming from the likes of Gates of Zuckerburg. But you never know. Disruptive innovation never come from the origins one might expect.
1
Agree entirely. On the face of it, one would need more insight about the actual social contexts than intellectually privileged millionaires may have access to... but one never knows, and I am sure many good things, if not a comprehensive system, will come out of their involvement.
I am traumatized by the apparent fact that such socially-psychologically radical interventions into one of the People's most hard-won & central collective institutions by billionaire ideological zealots could receive this type of flaccid rhetorically-endorsing reporting.
8
exactly. And the reporter never asked these tech billionaires why they aren't demanding this for the overpriced private schools that their kids attend before they foist this on the public schools.
3
And Besty DeVos used her wealth to influences schools in Michigan. Look how that works out!
5
Turning America's children into human lab-rats - controlling what they *get to learn*. Robotic beings able to compute but not empathize and enjoy attributes of a world of curiosity, beauty and wonderment: The latter doesn't pay well.
7
funny nobody mentioned the 100 year old Montessori method, although several of the points about kid directed learning were similar. why?
* it doesn't have the au courrant glamour of a device that works on electricity and focuses attention on a screen
* the attitude I've found frequently among the successful, especially in engineering, is that if you find yourself successful at one thing in life, it validates you as someone so inherently superior you can be equally succesful at anything you turn your hand to, even something you know nothing about
* there's the underlying attitude that teachers are pretty much no good, so a better approach would substitute a mechanism for expert teachers, rather than the more expensive approach of reducing the teacher-student ratio which everyone already knows improves outcomes
* it doesn't have the au courrant glamour of a device that works on electricity and focuses attention on a screen
* the attitude I've found frequently among the successful, especially in engineering, is that if you find yourself successful at one thing in life, it validates you as someone so inherently superior you can be equally succesful at anything you turn your hand to, even something you know nothing about
* there's the underlying attitude that teachers are pretty much no good, so a better approach would substitute a mechanism for expert teachers, rather than the more expensive approach of reducing the teacher-student ratio which everyone already knows improves outcomes
4
Tech billionaires and public school administrators. What a gruesome combination. Add middle schoolers to the mix and I think you've created a new black hole.
5
Wow. What blowback these tech companies are getting in this forum! Let's not be too naive here.
We talk about the backwards thinking of the current administration in trying to keep old technologies, such as coal and gas automobiles. Top energy and automobile companies rely on computers. Do you think tech companies are the only ones needing programmers?! Hogwash. Engineers hired today should have some programming under their belt. We talk about our nation's vulnerability to Russian hacking and how we need cyber experts to counteract their aggression. Where will we get these folks? They don't grow on trees.
Wake up folks--computers are EVERYWHERE and we need people to develop them, run the, and maintain them. If we don't use our own citizens to do so, then companies, and not just tech ones, will have to get these developers and technicians from China and India. That's a fact and that's why Trump unfortunately got elected.
We talk about the backwards thinking of the current administration in trying to keep old technologies, such as coal and gas automobiles. Top energy and automobile companies rely on computers. Do you think tech companies are the only ones needing programmers?! Hogwash. Engineers hired today should have some programming under their belt. We talk about our nation's vulnerability to Russian hacking and how we need cyber experts to counteract their aggression. Where will we get these folks? They don't grow on trees.
Wake up folks--computers are EVERYWHERE and we need people to develop them, run the, and maintain them. If we don't use our own citizens to do so, then companies, and not just tech ones, will have to get these developers and technicians from China and India. That's a fact and that's why Trump unfortunately got elected.
35
Schools in China and India depend on memorization and rote learning, all is geared to succeeding in the next test which will put them on the way to becoming engineers, et al. Neither country encourages creative learning, or any creativity at all. When they come to the U.S. they have to learn how to think independently, how to socialize in a multi-cultural environment, how to succeed in a diverse economic culture. There is very little mentoring or attempts to bring ordinary, non-gifted students along. Students are never encouraged to question or challenge a teacher or lesson. We do not need to copy that kind of education; we still field some of the most brilliant scientists, mathematicians, musicians and artists. Because we encourage independent thinking. Neither country has yet solved their pollution problems; neither country has moved to purchase scrubbers for their mercury spewing factories; neither country has 21st Century sanitation in place, in India where sewage still gets dumped into waterways. Or China where industrial toxic waste enters into irrigation systems.
Hey Chris.
I'm well aware of the type of education China and India provide--I used to teach transfer students. But you're missing my point. If I was a parent in Appalachia, I would rather my child be a programmer than a coal miner--or at least give them the choice. Why can't a technical education coexist with traditional subject matter? Can they both enhance each other in some way? I'm using a computer right now to speak to you in Chico for goodness sake.
Learning how to program a computer and use it to quickly gain data requires critical thinking and then frees up more time for other types of creative thinking and problem solving. Raw data collection and processing can take months or years to get manually. Computers have helped climate change scientists make a valid case that it's not a hoax! The founder of Nvidia wanted to create a more realistic video gaming experience and in doing so, created a processor that made better global mapping and medical imaging possible.
Computers are not going away, can provide a good living, especially in states with a lower cost of living, can add much needed dollars to communities that need the revenue dearly (read up on North Carolina), and most of what I read in the posts are folks who have no conception of what that might mean to countless children who now live in poverty.
Take the money and the help, only let trained educators make decisions on curriculum, and let our kids get prepared for the future.
I'm well aware of the type of education China and India provide--I used to teach transfer students. But you're missing my point. If I was a parent in Appalachia, I would rather my child be a programmer than a coal miner--or at least give them the choice. Why can't a technical education coexist with traditional subject matter? Can they both enhance each other in some way? I'm using a computer right now to speak to you in Chico for goodness sake.
Learning how to program a computer and use it to quickly gain data requires critical thinking and then frees up more time for other types of creative thinking and problem solving. Raw data collection and processing can take months or years to get manually. Computers have helped climate change scientists make a valid case that it's not a hoax! The founder of Nvidia wanted to create a more realistic video gaming experience and in doing so, created a processor that made better global mapping and medical imaging possible.
Computers are not going away, can provide a good living, especially in states with a lower cost of living, can add much needed dollars to communities that need the revenue dearly (read up on North Carolina), and most of what I read in the posts are folks who have no conception of what that might mean to countless children who now live in poverty.
Take the money and the help, only let trained educators make decisions on curriculum, and let our kids get prepared for the future.
When you say "we need people to develop them, run them and maintain them" the key word is PEOPLE. A person is not a rat in a science experiment. When we start depersonalizing children and treating them like little robots so we can use them to "win," civilization starts to lose. There's a place for computing and there's nothing bad to say about teaching computing and programming skills for what they are. But turning every realm of development and learning into an opportunity to do more computing is beyond learning competitive skills. There's already a downward trend in levels of empathy among young people raised on digital devices. It won't be long before we ever-so-rationally decide that there's no point supporting fellow citizens whose skills don't translate into enhanced global economic prowess. Oh, did you say we're there? Almost.
2
Some of Gates' and Zuckerberg's attempt to digitize the school learning experience have failed and their experiments actually hurt the education of students and put many further and hopelessly behind. With a little googling effort, articles and books can be found that detail the failures of their ideas and methods.
Maybe we should not allow our young to be guinea pigs in educational experiments run by billionaires who do not have any educational or other background in early childhood education, the psychology of learning or neuropsychology. These guys do not know what they are doing,t hey are simply using students as guinea pigs in experiments attempting to bolster their own theories.
Those who teach in high schools, community colleges or colleges can easily attest how inferior today's social media-drenched students are compared to students a few decades ago. Today's young are so used to being entertained, they cannot sit still long enough to follow an abstract argument, or to read a book, or conduct an actual analysis; their attention spans are shot; they are physically weak and flaccid from lack of exercise; and their brains are weak and flaccid from being nothing but passive consumers of what various screens show them instead of engaging their own brains in analysis.
Maybe we should not allow our young to be guinea pigs in educational experiments run by billionaires who do not have any educational or other background in early childhood education, the psychology of learning or neuropsychology. These guys do not know what they are doing,t hey are simply using students as guinea pigs in experiments attempting to bolster their own theories.
Those who teach in high schools, community colleges or colleges can easily attest how inferior today's social media-drenched students are compared to students a few decades ago. Today's young are so used to being entertained, they cannot sit still long enough to follow an abstract argument, or to read a book, or conduct an actual analysis; their attention spans are shot; they are physically weak and flaccid from lack of exercise; and their brains are weak and flaccid from being nothing but passive consumers of what various screens show them instead of engaging their own brains in analysis.
6
In fact, many students at state colleges no longer even know how to memorize information, much less follow or construct an argument.
3
In math the United States ranks 41st in the world. Vietnam comes in at 22nd. I think many of the responses below reflect a circling of the wagon rather than a balanced approach to the issue. If these titans have a better idea then I am willing to listen. I am certainly not in favor though, of turning our children into coding automatons. Once the computers learn how to code themselves all these oxygen sucking coders will be out of a job. So in addition to math and science, make sure to read history, biography, classical literature, etc. Of course expecting an eighth grader to read Richard II will be a tough sell when there is coding to do.
1
The "start-up" economy has not worked all that well, with investors intervening in business decisions, personnel changed around frequently, making workers feel insecure, and a reliance on bluster and strutting to sell ideas. This is not a good model for schools.
The Zuckerberg plan also sucks in social problems -- not all students are comfortable or welcomed into groups that cluster around computers. Some students are shy, or shunned.
Worst of all is the fact that students in middle school will choose areas to focus on which are suitable for their age, but which don't necessarily prepare them for a career or full participation in civic life. Accustoming them to video games is not a recipe for social or professional success.
There is a role for government. Education has to be for everybody, not just people with hot new ideas. Money may be desperately needed in somebody else's town -- is San Francisco really the neediest school system in the country? If the money these investors are using was subtracted from the school budget, and the resulting savings spent in less privileged areas, there might be some sense to it. As reported here, though, it is going toward focused centers, some of them charter schools which are themselves experimental. We should be lifting up communities with plenty of talented, intelligent children, some of whom are food and healthcare insecure, few of whom are in the pipeline to employment. Start with the lowest one percent.
The Zuckerberg plan also sucks in social problems -- not all students are comfortable or welcomed into groups that cluster around computers. Some students are shy, or shunned.
Worst of all is the fact that students in middle school will choose areas to focus on which are suitable for their age, but which don't necessarily prepare them for a career or full participation in civic life. Accustoming them to video games is not a recipe for social or professional success.
There is a role for government. Education has to be for everybody, not just people with hot new ideas. Money may be desperately needed in somebody else's town -- is San Francisco really the neediest school system in the country? If the money these investors are using was subtracted from the school budget, and the resulting savings spent in less privileged areas, there might be some sense to it. As reported here, though, it is going toward focused centers, some of them charter schools which are themselves experimental. We should be lifting up communities with plenty of talented, intelligent children, some of whom are food and healthcare insecure, few of whom are in the pipeline to employment. Start with the lowest one percent.
2
Perhaps I'll be labeled "backward-thinking" or "closed-minded". Don't get me wrong...technology has enriched my life immensely, in my profession and in my pursuits. But education should (and has to) begin early with the basic building blocks of slowly learning each delicious discovery of words and numbers and then proceeding to the combining of these. Then on to creative thinking, using those same building blocks. If they are only offered as a later stage using technology, then learning could be more easily led down lesser choices of paths. As for these unbelievably privileged few multi-billionaires, they equate wealth with intelligence. Most if not all have achieved their status by being business savvy...or in my opinion, screwing the competition. Netscape (a hugely innovative company) was silenced by Microsoft "offering" Internet Explorer for free. Did Zuckerberg really come up with his idea on his own? Even Jobs wrangled the new graphic front by shnookering Xerox. Do these "giants" really have all the answers?
Yet I still want to see a new (old-fashioned) approach to education. Teacher unions are not the answer.
Yet I still want to see a new (old-fashioned) approach to education. Teacher unions are not the answer.
4
This is a profoundly undemocratic phenomenon, and an ethical morass. These VCs are making donations with an expectation of a return on investment, ie getting their software licensed by public schools & siphoning public money in the long run. I'm reminded of the $100M in Facebook money Cory Booker squandered as mayor of Newark, leaving public schools no better off.
5
What about hybrid learning? ODing on computer-aided-learning may not work, because students need to interact both mentally and physically, over time. In Finland, for example, all students have 15 minutes of outdoor exercise, every hour of the school day.
And what about focusing on students helping other students to learn? This adds a sense of immediacy and purpose: Learn in order to teach. Computers can facilitate the process of shared learning. And what about lifetime learning for job improvement with computer-aided-learning
Reading, writing and rithmetic, taught to the tune of computers. and people.
=========================================================
And what about focusing on students helping other students to learn? This adds a sense of immediacy and purpose: Learn in order to teach. Computers can facilitate the process of shared learning. And what about lifetime learning for job improvement with computer-aided-learning
Reading, writing and rithmetic, taught to the tune of computers. and people.
=========================================================
1
Why don't they just put their money toward the Guaranteed Minimum Income and cut out the middleman?
3
In the Readers’ Pick I see 100% agreement that these billionaires are evil. But what I find especially fascinating is the agreement that the technology-driven approaches they are encouraging are also evil, or at least misguided.
Our kids will need a much better education to compete in the tough world of the future. Except at the worst possible time the performance of our schools has stalled.
Part of the reason America has had the success we've had—so far—is our energetic application of technology. Yet there is still one industry we have yet to automate – K-12 education. Why is there such resistance to the use of technology to help kids learn better?
To me, the best way technology could help is to support individualized learning, and a move away from hope-you-can-learn-at-our-pace large group instruction. Yet the commenters not only attack technology but the individualized learning it could enable. My first job was in a central city school, where virtually all the kids quickly fell off the graded pace and were doomed. To me, individualized instruction is the answer. Why are we fighting this?
Because it decreases human interaction? If the DreamBox people say kids should hit the help button rather than ask for help from their wonderful teacher—who, thanks to this product, is now free to provide one-on-one tutoring—the answer is not get rid of DreamBox, it’s simply tell them to quit giving this bad advice.
To quote that great observer of education, Charlie Brown, AAUGH!
Our kids will need a much better education to compete in the tough world of the future. Except at the worst possible time the performance of our schools has stalled.
Part of the reason America has had the success we've had—so far—is our energetic application of technology. Yet there is still one industry we have yet to automate – K-12 education. Why is there such resistance to the use of technology to help kids learn better?
To me, the best way technology could help is to support individualized learning, and a move away from hope-you-can-learn-at-our-pace large group instruction. Yet the commenters not only attack technology but the individualized learning it could enable. My first job was in a central city school, where virtually all the kids quickly fell off the graded pace and were doomed. To me, individualized instruction is the answer. Why are we fighting this?
Because it decreases human interaction? If the DreamBox people say kids should hit the help button rather than ask for help from their wonderful teacher—who, thanks to this product, is now free to provide one-on-one tutoring—the answer is not get rid of DreamBox, it’s simply tell them to quit giving this bad advice.
To quote that great observer of education, Charlie Brown, AAUGH!
1
So glad to be nearly done with my teaching career!
2
Still waiting for an accounting and academic assessment of the $100 Million dollar donation to Newark Public Schools Mr.. Zuckerberg made under then Mayor Cory Booker in 2010. Technology is a tool; excellent teachers represent true disruptive innovation.
5
America used to have the best public schools in the world. We were the land of opportunity. Now our billionaires have infiltrated the public schools to create little worker bees and the next generation of consumers. Why don't we look towards other countries who are beating us with their top notch education and start using what works in our own schools.
6
I didn't vote for these guys, and I wish they'd stop thinking that philanthropy substitutes for proper funding of public schools and that it gives them an excuse to bypass state and local control. Kudos to Mr. Bennion for letting schools innovate and decide what they need. Curses to all the others who are using schools for their own technology and social-engineering purposes.
It's clear from your story that the billionaire's club looks at curriculum and instruction as nothing but "subject matter" which can be optimally delivered, like Amazon packages. Schooling is so much more. It's supposed to reflect our shared cultural values and it somehow has to balance individual and social needs. That's just impossible when the ultra-rich step in and try to re-invent schools based on their own notions of what the rest of us---the regular folks---want.
Please, Mr. Gates, Zuckerberg, Hastings, Dell, Bezos, et al, don't destroy one of our most important social institutions by your own hubris. To everyone else, I say it's time we recognize the invidious assault on our public schools and we work together to reclaim them!
It's clear from your story that the billionaire's club looks at curriculum and instruction as nothing but "subject matter" which can be optimally delivered, like Amazon packages. Schooling is so much more. It's supposed to reflect our shared cultural values and it somehow has to balance individual and social needs. That's just impossible when the ultra-rich step in and try to re-invent schools based on their own notions of what the rest of us---the regular folks---want.
Please, Mr. Gates, Zuckerberg, Hastings, Dell, Bezos, et al, don't destroy one of our most important social institutions by your own hubris. To everyone else, I say it's time we recognize the invidious assault on our public schools and we work together to reclaim them!
7
Methinks a SPORTS-DRIVEN curriculum would suit the mindsets of many in California's high schools - using sports, one can derive a less boring, more salient English/Writing high school course, History course, Statistics (of course!)Art, Music, Math and incorporate into foreign language studies - easy-peezy! If only someone would hear my call, from here in the trenches...
Frankly we have too much sports influence in schools...
5
Resources being poured into education by the Valley are impressive, but let's not lose our way. Technology is here to stay, but let's focus on great teachers who construct learning alongside their students.
Teachers should not merely function as guides while students self-direct all of their learning on a device. Otherwise, we are in danger of losing the human-centered, social-emotional experiences we all crave and need -- a last bastion of interaction that technology and AI cannot replace...at least for now.
Teachers should not merely function as guides while students self-direct all of their learning on a device. Otherwise, we are in danger of losing the human-centered, social-emotional experiences we all crave and need -- a last bastion of interaction that technology and AI cannot replace...at least for now.
2
* Does salesforce pay CA sales tax on products sold
* Did salesforce extort city/state benefits on expansion projects
* Do salesforce exec pay fair % of income/options = taxes on worker wages
These are the best sources of corporate generosity.
* Did salesforce extort city/state benefits on expansion projects
* Do salesforce exec pay fair % of income/options = taxes on worker wages
These are the best sources of corporate generosity.
2
I was teaching several years ago when Dreambox was first introduced in my district. I don't know how the program operates now, but at that time students were able to be selective in their Dreambox choices. As a result, many students would avoid materials they didn't like, usually those that they needed to learn. It took teacher oversight and a lot more teacher input than many may realize to ensure the students were getting what they needed, not just what they liked.
The idea of teacher as mentor / facilitator has its good points, but this role needs to be well-defined and teachers well trained in the methodology.
The idea of teacher as mentor / facilitator has its good points, but this role needs to be well-defined and teachers well trained in the methodology.
3
Students can still be selective, and spend most of their time with the less educational aspects of it, as the parent notes.
1
Technology has killed public schools. These technology kings are addicts spreading their disease onto kids and society. Children are addicted to cell phones and electronic devices. One in eight Americans suffers from problematic Internet use, according to a study published in The International Journal of Neuropsychiatric Medicine, and rates are even higher in many Asian countries. An estimated 30 percent or more of the Chinese population is classified as highly addicted to the Web.
6
I don't see the concern over philanthropists giving money and time towards education. The old system was broken, and no matter how much money was being thrown at it, it still had the same outcomes. Is there risk with change? Yes, and it is essential that these new programs be rigorously tested by outsiders to ensure that they are effective. If I were an administrator, I wouldn't accept a program that didn't have outsiders studying the outcomes.
The argument that the only answer is to have better teachers also doesn't work for me. In any profession, only 50% of people are above average so we need to figure out ways to not only help those that are lucky enough to get the best teachers but also those that maybe aren't so lucky.
The argument that the only answer is to have better teachers also doesn't work for me. In any profession, only 50% of people are above average so we need to figure out ways to not only help those that are lucky enough to get the best teachers but also those that maybe aren't so lucky.
1
We are in trouble when the computer world becomes more "real", more engaging and more rewarding than the world we actually inhabit. Today's youth may become superior at solving technical problems, but the really big problems in the world are solved first by empathy, persuasion and grit, and last by arrogance, conceit and technology.
6
We should be grateful that Robert Mercer is not involved.
More to the point. Seymour Papert of MIT Media lab fame, who had studied with Jean Piaget, wrote two books about coding for children. The first, Mindstorms, was about the promise coding had to be the great transferable skill for which educators had searched after they realized that Latin didn't do the trick. The second, The Children's Machine, admitted that it hadn't worked, that getting the turtle to move around the floor led to getting the turtle to move around the floor.
On the other hand, the Singapore Math curriculum has been a great success. It elevated Singapore students from the midranks on international tables to the top one or two places. It was based on a better understanding of cognition, of how children (and the rest of us) come to understand and learn. I recommend that Benioff and Zuckerberg and everyone else involved take a look at Singapore Math and figure out why it was successful and how its approach might be extended beyond math to, well, everything we learn and understand. I can help.
More to the point. Seymour Papert of MIT Media lab fame, who had studied with Jean Piaget, wrote two books about coding for children. The first, Mindstorms, was about the promise coding had to be the great transferable skill for which educators had searched after they realized that Latin didn't do the trick. The second, The Children's Machine, admitted that it hadn't worked, that getting the turtle to move around the floor led to getting the turtle to move around the floor.
On the other hand, the Singapore Math curriculum has been a great success. It elevated Singapore students from the midranks on international tables to the top one or two places. It was based on a better understanding of cognition, of how children (and the rest of us) come to understand and learn. I recommend that Benioff and Zuckerberg and everyone else involved take a look at Singapore Math and figure out why it was successful and how its approach might be extended beyond math to, well, everything we learn and understand. I can help.
5
English teacher here.
I worry about the long-term results of these sorts of initiatives. I understand the values and benefits of a student-centered classroom, but I do not understand why pushing technology into all types of classrooms (particularly a humanities one) has been deemed to be so effective. I've seen my students sedated by screens, I've watched them lazily click through vocabulary exercises online to no avail, and I've noticed a major decline in basic language skills when writing an essay. Innovation is great, and developing educational tools to enhance student learning is wonderful! But simply innovating for the sake of entertainment or novelty is not the same as cultivating skills with patience, time, and care. That is what teachers spend their careers perfecting, and I don't feel that an algorithm can demonstrate the empathy, cheerleading, or critiquing that students need from a human being.
Not every student is a future entrepreneur, nor should every student be encouraged to be one. And not every student can learn like one! Society needs all kinds of kinds, and all kinds of kinds learn differently. It seems that Silicon Valley is painting its monetary aims as virtuous ones.
I worry about the long-term results of these sorts of initiatives. I understand the values and benefits of a student-centered classroom, but I do not understand why pushing technology into all types of classrooms (particularly a humanities one) has been deemed to be so effective. I've seen my students sedated by screens, I've watched them lazily click through vocabulary exercises online to no avail, and I've noticed a major decline in basic language skills when writing an essay. Innovation is great, and developing educational tools to enhance student learning is wonderful! But simply innovating for the sake of entertainment or novelty is not the same as cultivating skills with patience, time, and care. That is what teachers spend their careers perfecting, and I don't feel that an algorithm can demonstrate the empathy, cheerleading, or critiquing that students need from a human being.
Not every student is a future entrepreneur, nor should every student be encouraged to be one. And not every student can learn like one! Society needs all kinds of kinds, and all kinds of kinds learn differently. It seems that Silicon Valley is painting its monetary aims as virtuous ones.
16
While I agree that advanced education in science, math and technology is a vital aspect of modern life, I implore those who give the money and those who put it to use to save some for the arts. Unfortunately, in recent years arts education has been given the short straw, to the detriment of our children and their futures. We must acknowledge that not everyone can or wants to be a scientist or a mathematician and that civilization still needs artists, dancers, architects and musicians.
2
What if after we've totally given up our own lives and the lives of our children to these tech company and their wealthy founders' vision of what works best for them, we find out they were wrong as far as us goes? Doesn't matter, all about me means just that. America really is anything but the land of the free, not at today's prices.
2
Seems logical to me. Our education system has not been producing the talent we need to innovate and produce in our most technical industries. Betsy Devos doesn't seem inclined to address the issue, and with the Trump's attacks on immigration getting the talent they need in these industries will become even more challenging. Worst case scenario: if they can't address the talent shortage at home, they may have to relocate and that would be catastrophic to the US economy. Its certainly not the fault of the industries that the US govt has not matched their efforts or even attempted to keep up.
I also think projects like Mark Zuckerberg's are exactly what the education system needs. This notion that students can only get their information from a teacher is completely unrealistic as well as impractical. To live in today's society requires people to seek out information from multiple sources and synthesize them for their own purposes. The sheer presence of the internet demands this. It's long past time we adopted this notion in our own educational practices. Some schools have are already been attempting and finding major success for students both while attending and after graduating. Its a proven method and we're overdue to upgrade our notion of learning.
It's time to stop being cynical about moving into the future.
I also think projects like Mark Zuckerberg's are exactly what the education system needs. This notion that students can only get their information from a teacher is completely unrealistic as well as impractical. To live in today's society requires people to seek out information from multiple sources and synthesize them for their own purposes. The sheer presence of the internet demands this. It's long past time we adopted this notion in our own educational practices. Some schools have are already been attempting and finding major success for students both while attending and after graduating. Its a proven method and we're overdue to upgrade our notion of learning.
It's time to stop being cynical about moving into the future.
2
I don't think Silicon Valley is "subverting Democracy" because Public Schools were subverted by the Federal Government when Reagan decided to make the Office of Education into a Department of Education...learning has taken a backseat to standardize tests and creativity is being snuffed out. And bravo for the influx of some money: maybe these guys can start renovating the physical space of schools: redesign the warehouse into a more spacious use of, well, space. Let's face it the future is in the technology and disseminating information and innovation. What teachers will have to do is teach computer literacy and civic minded behavior when using such a powerful tool along with the most important skills of Reading, Thinking, and Writing.
1
Once again, Reagan gets blamed for something he didn't do. In fact, it was under the advocacy of Jimmy Carter that the federal DOEd was created, a law he signed in 1979. It actually started in 1980 after Reagan came into office, but the blame - and blame it should be - rests with Carter.
1
Yes I know but the fact is President Reagan was delighted to appoint William Bennett....and he could have issued an EO right?
2
Although recent innovations have been a great boon in primary and secondary classrooms and there is often value in change, we should be skeptical of this soft takeover of our schools by what is a relatively new industry. Several points in no particular order:
1) Stanley Katz had a great article a few years ago about the out-sized influence of wealthy philanthropists on education (available at http://www.chronicle.com/article/philanthropys-new-math/27633 behind a paywall). Although a relative pittance in comparison with education budgets, the funds that Gates, et al. offer without many strings attached in an age of shrinking budgets gives benefactors huge influence on policy... and policy huge real effects on millions of children's lives.
2) While it seems that "personalized education" is a dream that might lead to every child reaching her full potential (at least in the minds of the anti-one-size-fits-all-ists), it's also important for students to struggle. An algorithm that sends you bad movie recommendations can in no way replace a highly professional, empathetic teacher who knows when to push and when to comfort. Students should struggle with the medium at times as much as the message.
3) Students are savvy consumers of digital culture, true-- mine recognize how poor on line resources are -- but let's not forget that it was my generation (40+) who managed the transition from an analog world to a digital one. Students need some offline reflection on the process.
1) Stanley Katz had a great article a few years ago about the out-sized influence of wealthy philanthropists on education (available at http://www.chronicle.com/article/philanthropys-new-math/27633 behind a paywall). Although a relative pittance in comparison with education budgets, the funds that Gates, et al. offer without many strings attached in an age of shrinking budgets gives benefactors huge influence on policy... and policy huge real effects on millions of children's lives.
2) While it seems that "personalized education" is a dream that might lead to every child reaching her full potential (at least in the minds of the anti-one-size-fits-all-ists), it's also important for students to struggle. An algorithm that sends you bad movie recommendations can in no way replace a highly professional, empathetic teacher who knows when to push and when to comfort. Students should struggle with the medium at times as much as the message.
3) Students are savvy consumers of digital culture, true-- mine recognize how poor on line resources are -- but let's not forget that it was my generation (40+) who managed the transition from an analog world to a digital one. Students need some offline reflection on the process.
9
A lot of the technology described here sounds like an electronic version of the oldest resource of overwhelmed, unskilled, or disaffected teachers: the worksheet. Instead of filling out multiple choice questions on paper, you are using a computer. That's fine for limited, rote learning, but it does nothing to promote higher levels of critical thinking. We need less and less to memorize facts. That kind of skill can be done far more effectively by AI. If you want students to expand their thinking, there is no substitute for conversation and engagement in the classroom. As a child I spent hours filling out worksheets, bored and disengaged. I shudder to think that that is the direction tech is pushing us.
7
Natasha singer buried the lede. At the end of the Benieoff segment, it was casually revealed that his $20 million infusion allowed math class sizes to be reduced from 33 pupils to 24 by hiring more teachers.
Funny, teachers have been advocating smaller class sizes for many years.
So here's the plan: systematically starve the system of resources, then let Venture Capitalists play guardian angels to create their own pretrained employees.
Teaching coding in pre-K? Can't think of a worse idea.
These kids will only know short attention span theatre.
Funny, teachers have been advocating smaller class sizes for many years.
So here's the plan: systematically starve the system of resources, then let Venture Capitalists play guardian angels to create their own pretrained employees.
Teaching coding in pre-K? Can't think of a worse idea.
These kids will only know short attention span theatre.
9
In most places, the infusion of tech into school increases class sizes or cuts other vital needs in schools because of the diversion of resources to pay for technology. Thus, the situation is even worse outside of SF.
2
I see technology as a way to extend the reach of a teacher, to make it possible to individualize lessons for kids that you are only given on average 2 minutes a day for individual interaction, to expand the breadth of expertise available to kids.
My daughter and I have both experimented with online learning. One of the most important and perhaps less obvious positives that I've seen is the opportunity for online courses give immediate feedback on your answers. Lessening the time of the attempt to the knowledge of whether the answer was correctly reached is HUGE for correct learning - instead of for example doing hours of math homework and finding out a week later that you didn't understand it and practiced hours of doing it wrong, from the very first problem you either get confirmed that your technique and understanding was correct or that it was not. Anyone teaching athletes will tell you that incorrect practice is more damaging than no practice at all, and this is just as true for math and english and history.
But it is also completely true that "Kids will self-pace to failure," especially on material that is challenging or uninteresting to them. My educated guess would be that maybe one in a thousand kids can manage themselves through online material without close supervision and assistance from an adult. The computer isn't a teacher; it's a book and a worksheet.
As for video gamification, learning shouldn't be unpleasant. Ask any Zelda fan about the history of Hyrule.
My daughter and I have both experimented with online learning. One of the most important and perhaps less obvious positives that I've seen is the opportunity for online courses give immediate feedback on your answers. Lessening the time of the attempt to the knowledge of whether the answer was correctly reached is HUGE for correct learning - instead of for example doing hours of math homework and finding out a week later that you didn't understand it and practiced hours of doing it wrong, from the very first problem you either get confirmed that your technique and understanding was correct or that it was not. Anyone teaching athletes will tell you that incorrect practice is more damaging than no practice at all, and this is just as true for math and english and history.
But it is also completely true that "Kids will self-pace to failure," especially on material that is challenging or uninteresting to them. My educated guess would be that maybe one in a thousand kids can manage themselves through online material without close supervision and assistance from an adult. The computer isn't a teacher; it's a book and a worksheet.
As for video gamification, learning shouldn't be unpleasant. Ask any Zelda fan about the history of Hyrule.
3
Kids need more engagement time, not rote learning through a device. This may be the future, and it may personalize learning a little, but it's actually just an algorithm that satisfies share holders. The best teachers would use this as just another tool in the shed. But what an expensive shed Silicon Valley is building.
6
Mark Zuckerberg: "Goal: Personalized Learning for every child." The device you don't like, Chris -Helps teachers organize each childs file -cuts back the wasted time so they can have MORE engagement time.
I see you read the article -I don't think you understood it, though.
I see you read the article -I don't think you understood it, though.
1
Do they actually seek the input of any teachers? Politicians and business leaders love to wax on about what is happening at schools, but they need more input from classroom teachers, parents and students. So frustrating. They all think they have the answers and don't talk to the people who actually do.
16
As a retired public school teacher and guidance counselor, who first started working in a classroom in 1985, I feel that our schools need all the help they can get! Entrepreneur-types have been running schools for decades. They generally are not very successful, and often ridiculously narcissistic. The "disruption" created by successful, wealthy entrepreneurs is opening up some very clogged veins in a dying system. So many schools are on life-support. I've taught in schools where ancient remains of computers sit in the back of crowded classrooms, collecting dust. They are about as useful as garden gnomes. In these schools, there is virtually no reliable Internet access, and the only computers that the children get to use are the testing laptops, if they're fifth graders. They are trained on these for mandatory state testing, not for learning. Repetitive, outdated software is placed on the few classroom desktop computers that actually work. These are used for before or after school "tutoring." Hardly self-paced student learning, unless you take into consideration that the supervising teachers are busy at their own desks, or in the hallway talking to other teachers. Yes, the child assigned to tutoring because of failing test scores is on her own...
2
All this emphasis on STEM education, but none on teaching the humanities: we are breeding a nation of slaves.
16
And ignorant ones with little depth at that. So sad.
1
When Zuckerberg and Chan place their own children in classrooms like this - where their kids are left to learn on the computer with one "facilitator" teacher for 30 or 50 kids - then we can talk.
Where are all the PRIVATE schools running to enact this in their school since it supposedly works so well? oh, your children are too good for this? Yes, the rest of us understand that you hope the rest of us help you get even richer while you keep your own children away from what you preach is best for other people's kids.
Next you'll be selling our kids snacks and soda at a nice little profit and telling us it's fine because they are buying them!
Where are all the PRIVATE schools running to enact this in their school since it supposedly works so well? oh, your children are too good for this? Yes, the rest of us understand that you hope the rest of us help you get even richer while you keep your own children away from what you preach is best for other people's kids.
Next you'll be selling our kids snacks and soda at a nice little profit and telling us it's fine because they are buying them!
11
How is giving 100 Million to implement "experimental" fresh ideas from teachers, students and principals -A bad thing?
Yo RJ -Where can we find the work you've done to begin changing the education system? How much did you spend?
Yo RJ -Where can we find the work you've done to begin changing the education system? How much did you spend?
1
The dirty little secret of Silicon Valley and its many influentials: Their kids are enrolled in small-class-size, humanities- and creativity-focused Montessori and Waldorf schools. I mean, really, why would they put THEIR little snowflakes in regimented, large-class schools with moderately-paid teachers who must meet high goals that are all about and only about test scores? You gotta be kiding.
5
In the old days, people interested in making better schools looked to make the schools MORE like the schools the rich and privileged children had.
Now the billionaires send their kids to one kind of school and "implement fresh ideas" (ie. bribe public schools to use their technology) only on public schools. Maybe you can explain why these billionaires don't want their own children to learn this way and yet are spending millions for other people's children? Altruism? Are you really that naive?
Now the billionaires send their kids to one kind of school and "implement fresh ideas" (ie. bribe public schools to use their technology) only on public schools. Maybe you can explain why these billionaires don't want their own children to learn this way and yet are spending millions for other people's children? Altruism? Are you really that naive?
5
Thank god I don't live in San Francisco. I want my kid to grow up to have a holistic education, i want schools to be nurturing environments while TEACHING my kids something (otherwise I can just keep them at home and hook them up on the web with random kids to "self teach") and I want my kids to explore much more than just technology, coding and science. Yes Silicon Valley there is a whole world out there, i feel sorry for what you are doing to your kids and I am amazed that San Francisco is allowing its public schools to be undermined this way
10
"Administrators in some districts said that students so enjoyed the math program that some had begged their parents to let them play DreamBox even during trips to the supermarket" . Oh, the horror. I'd put my trust in tech giants and modern psychometricians any day over teacher's unions. The only problem I see with bothe of the aforementioned groups is they are ignoring the reality that American schools need to steer a large segment of grads to a trade NOT a college. Having said that. Let the uberizaiton of education begin. May the best app win. Seriously. These interactive apps can increase STEM and Humanities achievement and be customized to student levels so that truly, for the first time in history, every student does not get left behind. This will surely exacerbate the IQ gap in charter and voucher schools one day. Good. We need high IQ students to be given every opportunity available so America can remain competitive. Trade schools can help low IQ and high IQ students secure decent paying jobs until retraining, again done by apps, is needed.
1
This is what has happened as we defund public education--the people with big money move in and start calling the shots. We are essentially selling our kid's education and futures to the highest bidder.
This is definitely beta testing with your child as guinea pig. What do these billionaires know about education, pedagogy, learning styles, reaching children with learning disabilities? It is a prime opportunity for these billionaires to collect data on the future consumers in America...and then use it to their own economic advantage.
This is definitely beta testing with your child as guinea pig. What do these billionaires know about education, pedagogy, learning styles, reaching children with learning disabilities? It is a prime opportunity for these billionaires to collect data on the future consumers in America...and then use it to their own economic advantage.
12
Thanks for this article and series. This is what you get when as a society we do not adequately support and fund public education. That is, we have billionaire corporatists enticing underfunded schools and school districts with millions of dollars to be guinea pigs to advance their own self-interests. This is not education reform by any stretch of the imagination. Rather, it is corporate co-optation.
16
Sorry, the problem is not underfunding. We are spending 3X or more in inflation-adjusted dollars on public schools than we did 35 years ago. If that money had made a fundamental difference, I'd be fine with it. But it has not happened.
What we have are schools designed pretty much like the ones 100 years ago, but with much lower graduation requirements and worse-prepared students.
Schools today, like those earlier ones, have many dropouts, but the current-day dropouts have little hope of jobs that will allow them to support themselves, let alone their families. We are failing our children.
It's fun, perhaps, to imagine that "billionaire corporatist" bogeymen are out to undermine fundamentally solid education programs, but school leaders need to look in the mirror instead. Our public schools are structurally, adamantly resistant to change -- and not just in the classroom computer area.
We should be open to new ideas and give parents more say in these matters. Doubling down on what hasn't worked is not a plan.
What we have are schools designed pretty much like the ones 100 years ago, but with much lower graduation requirements and worse-prepared students.
Schools today, like those earlier ones, have many dropouts, but the current-day dropouts have little hope of jobs that will allow them to support themselves, let alone their families. We are failing our children.
It's fun, perhaps, to imagine that "billionaire corporatist" bogeymen are out to undermine fundamentally solid education programs, but school leaders need to look in the mirror instead. Our public schools are structurally, adamantly resistant to change -- and not just in the classroom computer area.
We should be open to new ideas and give parents more say in these matters. Doubling down on what hasn't worked is not a plan.
2
Then there are the facts that the US spends more than any other country on education: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-education-spending-tops-global-list-study... We certainly don't get a great return on investment, so the answer is not more money. The answer is changing the system.
2
The problem for educators is that everybody has some experience of school and everybody knows -- I'm telling you, they just KNOW -- what schools need. And I do mean EVERYBODY. The only difference between my neighbor's deep conviction that she just knows, absolutely KNOWS, what schools need to do and a billionaire's deep conviction that s/he knows what schools need to do, is that the billionaire has the resources to implement the next "big thing" in education. And like Tevye says in Fiddler on the Roof, "when you're rich, they think you really know."
11
Our country is in deep trouble because far too many Americans are deeply ignorant about how our democracy works and know little about our history
Yet all we focus on when discussing education reform are science, math and technology. Nazi Germany had no shortage of people well educated in those areas. Ditto for the Soviet Union.
We seem to think our public schools exist just to prepare kids for jobs, not to give them the k owledge and skills needed to be citizens in our democracy.
Yet all we focus on when discussing education reform are science, math and technology. Nazi Germany had no shortage of people well educated in those areas. Ditto for the Soviet Union.
We seem to think our public schools exist just to prepare kids for jobs, not to give them the k owledge and skills needed to be citizens in our democracy.
Brick and mortar schools are obsolete, the sooner they're closed down the better.
Teaching has been the same for thousands of years. It takes a well qualified and paid teacher and a small group of students. Not algorithms.
This is not philanthropy, it's business development disguised as philanthropy. Besides I am not sure what ACTUAL problems these guys have ever solved (Facebook? Netflix?) to want to try dealing with a very serious one.
This is not philanthropy, it's business development disguised as philanthropy. Besides I am not sure what ACTUAL problems these guys have ever solved (Facebook? Netflix?) to want to try dealing with a very serious one.
8
Education needs more investment, not less. On the flip side, education as a whole is not an algorithm and culture/geography/community define certain schools. There is no perfect formula, but let's not solely rely on technology. Empathy and human nature is equally as important.
1
I like technology, but after twenty years teaching an accelerated (IB) English class to urban high school juniors, I have discovered that technological innovations cannot do the following:
1. They can't teach your child how to critically read. That takes time, focus, discussion, more time, reflection on the part of the student and most likely a way to write in response to the reading.
2. Tech can also not teach your child how to become a better writer. That takes practice and more practice, individualized written and verbal feedback, class exemplars and then more practice. Practice requires a pen and paper or a keyboard and time.
3. Tech cannot make your child an avid listener. In fact, tech often distracts your child from being an avid listener. I should know--I am frequently the phone police. Ask every teacher in a district in which phones are allowed in classrooms. Our stealth skills as we spot your kid texting her boyfriend or playing some dumb video game or watching his favorite sports show have become uncanny.
4. Tech can't turn your child into an awesome and expressive presenter either. In fact, tech has allowed quite a few students to remain socially inhibited as the more introverted sometimes remain locked into their virtual worlds, with cyber-friendships, rather than engage with people face to face, make eye contact, learn to project their voice and so forth.
My takeaway: tech is a tool--it is not the answer to all educational questions.
1. They can't teach your child how to critically read. That takes time, focus, discussion, more time, reflection on the part of the student and most likely a way to write in response to the reading.
2. Tech can also not teach your child how to become a better writer. That takes practice and more practice, individualized written and verbal feedback, class exemplars and then more practice. Practice requires a pen and paper or a keyboard and time.
3. Tech cannot make your child an avid listener. In fact, tech often distracts your child from being an avid listener. I should know--I am frequently the phone police. Ask every teacher in a district in which phones are allowed in classrooms. Our stealth skills as we spot your kid texting her boyfriend or playing some dumb video game or watching his favorite sports show have become uncanny.
4. Tech can't turn your child into an awesome and expressive presenter either. In fact, tech has allowed quite a few students to remain socially inhibited as the more introverted sometimes remain locked into their virtual worlds, with cyber-friendships, rather than engage with people face to face, make eye contact, learn to project their voice and so forth.
My takeaway: tech is a tool--it is not the answer to all educational questions.
32
I've read through many of the comments and there seems to be more skepticism than support about having tech billionaires influence public education. And while I agree that there may be ulterior motives (selling computer equipment to public schools), creating future engineers (workforce for these companies), assuming tech can replace teachers, etc. are reasons not to support these initiatives, but unfortunately public education has been ignored for so long and there have been systematic budget cuts for years now. The successful public schools are often in expensive neighborhoods or where parents do a great deal of volunteer work and fund raise to supplement where the state falls short. So if you aren't lucky enough to go to one of these schools you miss out on a good education. At least these companies are doing something to help public education because the alternative was that nothing was happening. I agree with many of the other commentators that say increase teacher salaries, improve the actual facilities - these are not sexy initiatives but are badly needed. Which is why I like the Salesforce model which allows middle school principals to determine what they need the money for and why rather than a prescription of one size fits all. Though these ideas may not be perfect, only time will tell, at least an effort is being made to improve the public school education rather than abandon public schools the way our new Sec of Education Betsy DeVos would like to do.
3
What is missing from the entire discussion is a "meeting of the minds" as to what needs be taught and the methods needed to do that. Common core is a place to begin academically and perhaps some of Silicon Valley "radicalism" for methodology. What I do know is that today's students can not cobble together five words into a coherent sentence, can not add two three digit numbers without a calculator, can not read a paragraph and answer simple questions, and have not a clue as to where to go to get information necessary for problem solving and, if they manage to fall over it, what to do.
1
The hubris of these guys is breathtaking.
How dare they think they know what's best for children learning to learn? How dare they leverage America's public school students for their own financial benefit? How disrespectful they are of the profession of teaching, and of the financial vulnerability of school districts whose states do not fund public education sufficiently?
Who do they think they are?
How dare they think they know what's best for children learning to learn? How dare they leverage America's public school students for their own financial benefit? How disrespectful they are of the profession of teaching, and of the financial vulnerability of school districts whose states do not fund public education sufficiently?
Who do they think they are?
8
Exactly. Public education is doing just fine. Let's not mess with perfection.
2
Why don't people see what's going on here? Homework has turned into video games. Students are deciding what they should learn, not teachers. Libraries, once hallowed sanctuaries of quiet learning, are now hangout zones to stare at yet another screen. This is terrifying. As the corporate goon so chillingly said, “They are experimenting collectively and individually in what kinds of models can produce better results”. But these are children, and this is their education, this isn't an industrial process you should make more efficient. Is nothing sacred? Do we give even a second thought to what this consant gadget stimulation does to kids, the lack of respect for old fashioned hard work and creative initiative that only comes when you're not being assisted by machines constantly? I don't want Google or Amazon deciding which math problems my kids do, I want a teacher deciding that. Why should my kid's learning be directed by the profit motives of a global megacorporation? Is it possible that having my child turn out a well-rounded, sensitive, thoughtful person is not necessarily Google's top priority? People need to resist this and put childrens' interests first.
184
This is exactly why the rich should pay much higher taxes. Too much money, too much influence, too much driving of their own agendas without checks and balances. Let the polis decide what is good for society, not a few billionaires with good intentions. Oops, scratch that, not always, look what the Kochs and Mercer's managed to do with their nonprofits. These kids are being used as experiments, teachers are being side lined (again,) and turned into little consumers clicking away at the authority figure of the glowing screen. Terrifying.
My children's teachers in Seattle didn't seem to know enough math or science to teach it. Teachers like that are not any sort of solution. Requiring teachers to keep up with their subject should be the priority.
The corporatization of our public educational system essentially places an increasing control of the learning process in just a few wealthy hands. I dread the thought of a handful of tech companies eventually achieving an effective monopoly on the way and, potentially, on what our children learn. The ability to shape the minds and to foster the creativity of the coming generation is too important to leave to the privileged few.
5
"If Facebook’s Mr. Zuckerberg has his way, children the world over will soon be teaching themselves — using software his company helped build."
This is what it's all about - transferring public money into private hands.
This is what it's all about - transferring public money into private hands.
144
"This is what it's all about - transferring public money into private hands."
Kinda like . . . teachers' unions
Kinda like . . . teachers' unions
1
"...transferring public money into private hands..."
"Transferring taxpayer money into hands that uses it more efficiently and effectively." There - all fixed.
"Transferring taxpayer money into hands that uses it more efficiently and effectively." There - all fixed.
Yes, and we see how our nation has benefited from the tactics of billionaire business "disrupters" like Trumpski. When will we understand that fields like government, education, and healthcare are not the same as selling widgets? There are fields that actually require a strong desire to serve humanity, and these squishier fields resist reliance on the hard tools of business. You can't measure marigolds.
1
Ahhh! Progressive neoliberal plutocracy! No proof of concept or evidence needed. No dialogue with 2500 years of the philosophy of education required. The opposite, in fact. Make it up now! Having the big bucks is proof of concept, sufficient evidence, and all requisite knowledge and wisdom combined.
101
I could not agree with you more.
I would also like to mention a very important study done in Norway: "Reading
linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension" (Anne Mangen.Bente R. Walgermo, and Kolbjørn Brønnick). The author's conclusion? "Students who read texts in print scored significantly higher in reading comprehension than those who read texts digitally". I believe there are many in Silicon Valley who to try to bury this type of research. It is tragic that we continually defund schools and then look for guidance from people who have no background in education.
linear texts on paper versus computer screen: Effects on reading comprehension" (Anne Mangen.Bente R. Walgermo, and Kolbjørn Brønnick). The author's conclusion? "Students who read texts in print scored significantly higher in reading comprehension than those who read texts digitally". I believe there are many in Silicon Valley who to try to bury this type of research. It is tragic that we continually defund schools and then look for guidance from people who have no background in education.
33
As long time homeschoolers I know folks like Mark Zuckerberg, Marc Benioff, Peter Thiel, as well as the late Steve Jobs, and David Packard know that kids do best when they are encouraged to learn on their own, rather than being hovered over being told what to do.
So many high tech companies rely on employees that are self starters who like being given a project, a goal, which they then have to complete. Most Silicon Valley start ups be they Google, Facebook, even older companies like HP (David Packard was my mentor) and Apple were started by folks who were go getters, self starters who loved learning on their own with teachers being more akin to mentors than dictators, and they want to pass that lifelong love of learning onto present and future generations.
It should also be noted that San Francisco’s Marc Benioff the chief executive of Salesforce, also built the top rated UCSF Children's Hospital, so his interest and concern for children covers many areas.
And to those who are tempted to make snarky comments about any of these philanthropists I would simply ask, what are YOU doing to help our present and future generations? Folks like Mark Zuckerberg, Marc Benioff, Peter Thiel, are ALL hands on, in actually mentoring young people. They are not just handing out checks! What are YOU doing???
So many high tech companies rely on employees that are self starters who like being given a project, a goal, which they then have to complete. Most Silicon Valley start ups be they Google, Facebook, even older companies like HP (David Packard was my mentor) and Apple were started by folks who were go getters, self starters who loved learning on their own with teachers being more akin to mentors than dictators, and they want to pass that lifelong love of learning onto present and future generations.
It should also be noted that San Francisco’s Marc Benioff the chief executive of Salesforce, also built the top rated UCSF Children's Hospital, so his interest and concern for children covers many areas.
And to those who are tempted to make snarky comments about any of these philanthropists I would simply ask, what are YOU doing to help our present and future generations? Folks like Mark Zuckerberg, Marc Benioff, Peter Thiel, are ALL hands on, in actually mentoring young people. They are not just handing out checks! What are YOU doing???
1
I would ask where you come by such omniscience. That is indeed...divine.
1
I stopped grubbing for more money for myself when I felt I had accumulated enough.
1
I, for one, am doing everything I can to stop the takeover of public education by corporations like the ones you so guilelessly carry the water for. Like most techies, you suffer from the narcissism that leads you to think that if just everyone thought the way you did, the world would be so much better off. By the time today's first graders are old enough to enter college, consumer tech (Netflix, Facebook, and all of the coding software and learning game entertainments) will have long past plateaued and we will be reading all about something else more important. Education is not job training.
1
Not only is it a good thing, it's really public education's last, and only, hope to regain some social value. I live in Chicago, a city where most public schools (Southside K-6 especially) are execrable; crimes against childrens' minds, actually.
Now, if UC would just drop its vehement opposition to progress, by becoming a virtual university instead of the ultra-expensive brick-&-mortar one it is now, it could actually fulfill its original state chartered mission. To educate all California however young, old, ignorant and humble instead of an elite few selected by itself.
Now, if UC would just drop its vehement opposition to progress, by becoming a virtual university instead of the ultra-expensive brick-&-mortar one it is now, it could actually fulfill its original state chartered mission. To educate all California however young, old, ignorant and humble instead of an elite few selected by itself.
SMART MONEY During the era of Ronnie Ray Gun, underfunded schools were required to let kids see 30 minutes of informercials daily in order to get closed circuit TV systems donated. The schools also decided, disastrously, to permit private vending machines into the lunch rooms, thereby aiding and abetting the institutionalization of junk food for profit, which has ended up producing the worst episode of childhood obesity in US history. The Silicon Valley philanthropists are take a very different view of things, sharing strategies for learning that have helped their businesses to succeed. As with any systems to educate children, they must be used with due diligence. Zuckerburg's idea about having all students teach themselves may work in some contexts. However, all kids need the socialization and attachments to others in their families, communities and schools to succeed. Self-instruction is great, so long as it is supported by community building at the same time. I say that being an auto-didact. Both self-instruction and human relationships go hand in hand for successful education.
5
- human connection is a foundational aspect of education and tech can't replace that
- students "self-pacing to failure" sounds totally accurate based on my experience as a teacher.
- why not work to create better grade book systems, or special education systems? why is it always focused on the teaching & learning (user-facing?) side of education?
- the article is also extremely overblown--we're in no danger of radically changing the education system in this country anytime soon.
- there is still a total lack of research showing any positive correlation between most ed tech and student outcomes
- the real story here is that tech wants to create a tech-dependent generation starting at the youngest age, by causing students to become totally reliant on technology in every aspect of their lives
- students "self-pacing to failure" sounds totally accurate based on my experience as a teacher.
- why not work to create better grade book systems, or special education systems? why is it always focused on the teaching & learning (user-facing?) side of education?
- the article is also extremely overblown--we're in no danger of radically changing the education system in this country anytime soon.
- there is still a total lack of research showing any positive correlation between most ed tech and student outcomes
- the real story here is that tech wants to create a tech-dependent generation starting at the youngest age, by causing students to become totally reliant on technology in every aspect of their lives
2
Rarely is the question asked.... "What is the goal of education?"
Louis Menand wrote a brilliant essay on the role of higher education ("Live and Learn," New Yorker, June 6, 2011), but the take-aways are just as important for secondary school. Implicit in the billionaires' experiments with education programs are not only the billionaires' values but their assumptions of what "success" in education looks like.
Before aspiring to "transform" the education system, it would be worth articulating the goals, strategies, and metrics to measure progress. Specific skills may be one goal. Another might be inspiring pupils to become life-long learners. Another might be to develop the whole person, teaching respect and learning to recognize the value of each person regardless of their athletic or intellectual talents.
Louis Menand wrote a brilliant essay on the role of higher education ("Live and Learn," New Yorker, June 6, 2011), but the take-aways are just as important for secondary school. Implicit in the billionaires' experiments with education programs are not only the billionaires' values but their assumptions of what "success" in education looks like.
Before aspiring to "transform" the education system, it would be worth articulating the goals, strategies, and metrics to measure progress. Specific skills may be one goal. Another might be inspiring pupils to become life-long learners. Another might be to develop the whole person, teaching respect and learning to recognize the value of each person regardless of their athletic or intellectual talents.
4
The the purpose of education in a nutshell: to aid the successful pursuit of happiness.
1
As a teacher I can attest that these programs do help students. It's not replacing teachers it is simply aiding teachers. For example you could split your class into 2 groups: 1 group working with the teacher and the other group getting instruction from a computer based lesson that is personalized for each student. I don't think any teacher thinks it would be ok to have their students log on to one of these programs for the entire day. Not all classrooms have small class sizes or paraprofessionals (teacher aides) so this is perfect for them.
3
It shouldn’t be surprising that big business wants to create a workforce that reflects its values and ideals. The best place to instill these is in the classroom, but there are significant drawbacks with this approach. Education going back to the ancient Greeks has been about exploring and testing out new ideas, promoting creative thinking, and fostering those qualities that make each student unique.
Adopting an “engineering approach” breeds technicians with no identity and no individuality. Silicon valley is breeding a narrow-minded class of specialists who are never exposed to the world’s great literature, art, ideas, and humanitarian disciplines.
That the humanities and the arts has become devalued to the point of non-existence is reflected in the emphasis on STEM programs, and the promotion of careers in technology. This emphasis on numbers is so overwhelming that one wonders if Silicon Valley is simply trying to create an obedient, non-thinking, work force with no time to reflect. It is no longer a question if a human being has the strength to dare question the purpose and direction of his or her life. At this point, these executives hope that rising generations will have no idea that such a question exists.
This may be all well and good for some people and their masters, but there is more to life than zeros and ones. What we are seeing now in education is anti-human and far from the ideals of freedom and creativity that the liberal arts fostered.
Adopting an “engineering approach” breeds technicians with no identity and no individuality. Silicon valley is breeding a narrow-minded class of specialists who are never exposed to the world’s great literature, art, ideas, and humanitarian disciplines.
That the humanities and the arts has become devalued to the point of non-existence is reflected in the emphasis on STEM programs, and the promotion of careers in technology. This emphasis on numbers is so overwhelming that one wonders if Silicon Valley is simply trying to create an obedient, non-thinking, work force with no time to reflect. It is no longer a question if a human being has the strength to dare question the purpose and direction of his or her life. At this point, these executives hope that rising generations will have no idea that such a question exists.
This may be all well and good for some people and their masters, but there is more to life than zeros and ones. What we are seeing now in education is anti-human and far from the ideals of freedom and creativity that the liberal arts fostered.
7
You're right, there is more to life than zeros and ones. Today our schools are turning out marginally literate citizens, many of whom think Judge Judy is on the Supreme Court, and are unfamiliar with the Bill of Rights. And that's the on the civics end. We have a lot of room for improvement.
Nobody should pretend that digital learning will solve all the problems, but it stretches credulity to think that Silicon Valley capitalists -- who made their money with new ideas, not by staying on the sidewalk -- are out to turn our children into a bunch of automatons.
If you have ideas for improving the basic cultural literacy of our current high school students, we need to hear them.
Nobody should pretend that digital learning will solve all the problems, but it stretches credulity to think that Silicon Valley capitalists -- who made their money with new ideas, not by staying on the sidewalk -- are out to turn our children into a bunch of automatons.
If you have ideas for improving the basic cultural literacy of our current high school students, we need to hear them.
2
Zuckerburg hopes to "upgrade a majority" of US schools within the next decade based on the experience of 11 schools in California and Washington. It may sound enthusiastic to some, but it sounds more like dangerous, uninformed hubris to me.
3
It's not clear from the article whether any of these projects are going on in the worst, inner city schools that really need help. I hope they are putting at least some of their money where it seems like it could do the most good. Additionally, if you are hoping to scientifically demonstrate significant improvements, starting with a situation where there is more room for improvement makes success more likely.
1
Did not Steve Jobs himself limit his own children's exposure to digital devices during their formative years?
There is something to be said for reading, writing, and arithmetic - the basics. And then going on the arts and sciences. These not only lay the foundation of information, they tell what it is to be human.
Learning coding at a young age is fine. But to champion the computer and digital speed at tender years is folly.
There is something to be said for reading, writing, and arithmetic - the basics. And then going on the arts and sciences. These not only lay the foundation of information, they tell what it is to be human.
Learning coding at a young age is fine. But to champion the computer and digital speed at tender years is folly.
7
All this money sounds great, but at what cost? You have all these billionaires with all this new money to spend and now they want to play at social engineering. Why should we trust them? What strings are going to be attached and who will drive the curriculum? Teacher's unions and public school advocates are very adamant about the dangers that vouchers, and homeschooling and charter schools will have on public education, but it is extremely naive to think that all this money will be given, with no quid pro quo expected as to how it will be spent. I do not fault these geniuses their money or the work and talents that went into earning it. However, it has been, for some, fairly new and easy money for them. The education of our nation's children should not be the next plaything for these billionaires, or the next place to express their personal ideologies, now that they have the tremendous clout their money gives them. We shouldn't let the lure of that money color our decisions as educators.
1
The last time I heard anyone warning about the dangers of innovation was in the boardroom of a now-defunct state owned company in China. The education cartel in the U.S. seems to share the same cynical view towards reform and for the same reasons.
1
It's not what's best for kids, it's what's best for sales and egos. These guys know nothing about children.
13
WHY don't these guys just give money to the public schools so they can pay teachers well enough to keep good ones, upgrade often-crumbling buildings and facilities, buy books and computers, and alleviate often-terrible overcrowding (e.g. a lab and a library and a classroom jammed together in one room as in many NYC schools, even "good" ones)? Oh right, that's not "sexy" or "disruptive" enough! (And not feeding their egos enough since they could thus lose a self-"naming opportunity"!)
And perhaps even more ominous -- as Charles Ferguson made clear in “Inside Job” -- the most profound and worst corruption in our nation is the corruption of education, as shills (like Martin Feldman and Glenn Hubbard pass of "research" paid for by Wall Street as "independent" and "objective" or the likes of the Koch Bros found educational institutes dedicated to flogging their views (and ONLY their views).
Education is essential to the workings of democracy, as the Founders knew. Selling seduction and making it, instead, a tool of plutocrats' propaganda is probably the most corrosive aspect of the attack on democracy!
And perhaps even more ominous -- as Charles Ferguson made clear in “Inside Job” -- the most profound and worst corruption in our nation is the corruption of education, as shills (like Martin Feldman and Glenn Hubbard pass of "research" paid for by Wall Street as "independent" and "objective" or the likes of the Koch Bros found educational institutes dedicated to flogging their views (and ONLY their views).
Education is essential to the workings of democracy, as the Founders knew. Selling seduction and making it, instead, a tool of plutocrats' propaganda is probably the most corrosive aspect of the attack on democracy!
14
Zuckerberg gave $100 million to the underperforming Newark NJ school district and watched as the money got flushed down various ratholes, accomplishing nothing. The Newark students didn't benefit from his good intentions, but he learned something.
I love teachers, and we have many fine ones in this country. But school administrators, school boards and teachers unions tend to oppose any marginal change in the way schools are operated -- changes in the school day or the school year or classroom organization. They tend to favor more administrators over more teaching assistants. As students move into the upper grades, these leaders push parents away just as boys and girls most need adult role models.
I have met occasional exceptions to the above, but they are lonely warriors and they don't get far. Often they give up and change careers. Very sad.
I love teachers, and we have many fine ones in this country. But school administrators, school boards and teachers unions tend to oppose any marginal change in the way schools are operated -- changes in the school day or the school year or classroom organization. They tend to favor more administrators over more teaching assistants. As students move into the upper grades, these leaders push parents away just as boys and girls most need adult role models.
I have met occasional exceptions to the above, but they are lonely warriors and they don't get far. Often they give up and change careers. Very sad.
I suspect that this mild interference is how The Borg began . . .only kidding. Actually, the biggest problems here are that the goals of this money push are relatively nebulous so the results will be likewise difficult to perceive; children are not like widgets to be turned out. It isn't at all clear that what they seem to want may turn off many more students than it turns on. The people benefiting from this money influx will be the middle men "coordinators." Little of the incentive money will actually be used in the classroom, change the class curriculum, or pay the teachers. The people with the money know nothing about kids or education and the people who do are never asked for input. Another stupid money pit by the wealthy.
7
I teach A.P. English. What I really need is time alone to read books - some about pedagogy, some about content, and some just for fun. That's what rejuvenates me and makes me a better teacher.
Isn't this how thing were in the medieval age? A few rich sponsors, no real state to speak of? A
6
Mark Zuckerberg should focus on teaching critical thinking since Facebook's business model of greed has allowed fake news to proliferate online, drowning out voices of sanity and enabling us to hear those voice that think like we do so that our feed becomes the only thing we see and hear.
Google too, as you tube is a repository for phony conspiracy theories, hate speech and ISIS manuals and propaganda
Fake, phony and propaganda needs to be tagged, flagged and branded for what it is.
Google too, as you tube is a repository for phony conspiracy theories, hate speech and ISIS manuals and propaganda
Fake, phony and propaganda needs to be tagged, flagged and branded for what it is.
It's great for 'other people's children' but they don't allow their own children to consume their own 'dog food', Silicon Valley speak for using the products that they develop and market.
It's 21st century snake oil. Beware of these hucksters.
Money is always their bottom line, not altruism.
It's 21st century snake oil. Beware of these hucksters.
Money is always their bottom line, not altruism.
8
Face it, white men with money are the ruling class whether elected or not. With no diversity, it's a total echo chamber. Most though not all were born on third base so it's natural for them to think they've hit a triple without ever taking a swing. And many clearly believe their success makes them experts at most anything. But most of these programs really are marketing and sales tools for their brands.
4
Very easy and self-indulgent to speak of your 'commitment' to education, and then throw a few million dollars around (that is if you have thousands of millions). As an ex-high school teacher, I've seen much too much 'reform' driven by money-changers, their sycophants, and their brethren: right-wing privateers looking to break unions and make money from the public trough. Just awful.
Of course, one of our greatest sins is inequality. We have no soul for equality. We've been sold the rallying cry of freedom to drown out any semblance of community and equality of condition. And so, the billionaires and poverty rolls multiply. We lose credibility as a humane civilization. We elect the rich. We beg for lucre and sell-out love.
Joke that we're not focused on raising taxes on those worth over $100 million, or so. We're weak spiritually and politically. We talk of schools; as we avoid housing and health care and pensions and social security. We sell each other the dream-world of the rich; neglecting the reality of the underemployed and unemployed. We're bad for this place, these folks.
Nothing short of real realignment of why we're here (shown clearly by what our governments do, what policy's we follow) will do. Billionaires are bad for us. Bad for US. Bad for any country. Equality is good. Good for community. Good for ending poverty and desperation. Good; the greater good.
So, let's move out of the darkness of lust for lucre. Let's move into the hearts of our better angels. Today.
Of course, one of our greatest sins is inequality. We have no soul for equality. We've been sold the rallying cry of freedom to drown out any semblance of community and equality of condition. And so, the billionaires and poverty rolls multiply. We lose credibility as a humane civilization. We elect the rich. We beg for lucre and sell-out love.
Joke that we're not focused on raising taxes on those worth over $100 million, or so. We're weak spiritually and politically. We talk of schools; as we avoid housing and health care and pensions and social security. We sell each other the dream-world of the rich; neglecting the reality of the underemployed and unemployed. We're bad for this place, these folks.
Nothing short of real realignment of why we're here (shown clearly by what our governments do, what policy's we follow) will do. Billionaires are bad for us. Bad for US. Bad for any country. Equality is good. Good for community. Good for ending poverty and desperation. Good; the greater good.
So, let's move out of the darkness of lust for lucre. Let's move into the hearts of our better angels. Today.
3
Designer education is great but,......if you want to raise the educational profile of the collective US student, revitalize the middle class. The schools cannot right a sinking ship.
1
This is a very slippery slope. Tech companies have been known to ignore people with disabilities. The National Association of the Deaf sued and settled with Netflix whereby they agreed to caption its content. Should people with disabilities need to sue to accomplish the obvious?
The tech companies gather data on diversity but fail to include people with disabilities as if disabilities wasn't part of diversity... Why?
Will these tech companies do the same in our schools? If they say they will, then why aren't they including people with disabilities in their access, data collection and hiring practices?
Janice S. Lintz, CEO/Founder, Hearing Access & Innovations
The tech companies gather data on diversity but fail to include people with disabilities as if disabilities wasn't part of diversity... Why?
Will these tech companies do the same in our schools? If they say they will, then why aren't they including people with disabilities in their access, data collection and hiring practices?
Janice S. Lintz, CEO/Founder, Hearing Access & Innovations
A big mistake.
4
What, folks are surprised in learning that We The People actually means We The Guinea Pigs? Where have you all been for, oh, the last 100 years or so?
$100 million from Zuckerberg went down the drain in Newark.
That should be an object lesson on how not to do this.
But thanks to him and the others who are trying to help our schools.
That should be an object lesson on how not to do this.
But thanks to him and the others who are trying to help our schools.
4
The article mentions that DreamBox collects 50,000 data points per student per hour. What is the privacy policy around this? Will this data travel with the individual for the rest of their life? Who owns the data? Can DreamBox, or even the school, sell it to third parties?
As a professional Software Developer I am thoroughly skeptical.
As a professional Software Developer I am thoroughly skeptical.
1
Interesting to juxtapose this article with the article "Climate Science Meets A Stubborn Obstacle: Students," from just a few days ago. This article portrayed the resistance among students to a middle school teacher trying to teach them the scientific method. I wonder how such students will fare if, when Silicon Valley gets their wish, all students are allowed to completely direct their own learning, with the teacher merely as a "facilitator"? Food for thought!
3
God help us all,these vain idiots sticking there noses into education.
8
What we should be introducing more of to schools is physical education and daily exercise. Along with food preparation and learning how to grow a garden.
7
Expertise does not transfer across domains. Overconfidence does. These guys know a lot about tech but they know no more than I do about teaching kids, which is approximately zero.
I do some teaching. Maybe they can help me, too! Improve my teaching of med students. Improve the tuberculosis talk a bit. Give me some pointers on acid-base management.
Don't listen to these blowhards. Listen to people who are experts in education.
I do some teaching. Maybe they can help me, too! Improve my teaching of med students. Improve the tuberculosis talk a bit. Give me some pointers on acid-base management.
Don't listen to these blowhards. Listen to people who are experts in education.
6
The creeping totalitarianism of silicon valley is troubling and could be very bad for the country.
Forget all that history, philosophy, literature, and art nonsense. You just need to know how to peck code on a keyboard.
Silicon Valley wants exactly what the robber barons of the late 19th and early twentieth century wanted. Workers who are just smart enough to run and fix the machines, but not smart enough to realize they are getting screwed.
Forget all that history, philosophy, literature, and art nonsense. You just need to know how to peck code on a keyboard.
Silicon Valley wants exactly what the robber barons of the late 19th and early twentieth century wanted. Workers who are just smart enough to run and fix the machines, but not smart enough to realize they are getting screwed.
5
People learn in different ways. It's weird how there are always "reformers" who think they have a single solution to the K-12 system.
6
As a math teacher I am surprised how many people believe in "greater good" technology can actually bring to education. Those comapanies are simply looking for costumers for their computers and software. The only way to expand their businesses for them is make people believe that a computer can teach better than a highly qualified teacher. And public is not realizing that their tax dollars are just being wasted with no benefit to their kids. Yes, some technology can support student learning but it cannot replace a good teacher. Even use of calculators is hurting kids in some ways, see eight graders who still don't know their multiplication facts, let alone some other supposedly miraculous software. And look at Finland, the country with best education system. Don't we always read about their high quality teachers? When was the last time you heard about Finland's superior use of technology in schools and their miraculous software? Come on people, don't let those technology moguls get richer with your tax dollars. At the end, they will outsource all tech jobs they claim they are trying to create here to get even richer.
13
These titans of technology want a workforce capable of delivering power, prestige, and money for them. They want innovative robots, nothing more, nor less. They don't want to 'educate' the youth, they want to program them. Sad-and scary.
6
I am a public school teacher in the second-largest school district in the country, and I frequently see the results of so-called "innovations" to public education. Here is what I've noticed:
All so-called innovations involve technology. This technology must be purchased, which takes massive amounts of money. These massive amounts of money used to go directly into classrooms and had something to do with teaching. No longer.
The technology all seems to be aimed at removing teachers from direct, personal contact with students. It's obvious that the educational model of the future involves students sitting at devices, learning from the devices, while an adult - not a teacher necessarily - will supervise, solve tech problems, and - to use the favorite word of so-called educational reformers - facilitate.
In my opinion, the ultimate aim of these technological "reforms" is to create a cookie-cutter society; to stifle individuality; and ultimately, to subvert democracy and serve an oligarchy.
All so-called innovations involve technology. This technology must be purchased, which takes massive amounts of money. These massive amounts of money used to go directly into classrooms and had something to do with teaching. No longer.
The technology all seems to be aimed at removing teachers from direct, personal contact with students. It's obvious that the educational model of the future involves students sitting at devices, learning from the devices, while an adult - not a teacher necessarily - will supervise, solve tech problems, and - to use the favorite word of so-called educational reformers - facilitate.
In my opinion, the ultimate aim of these technological "reforms" is to create a cookie-cutter society; to stifle individuality; and ultimately, to subvert democracy and serve an oligarchy.
28
Amen. Under the guise of "personalized" learning and addressing achievement gaps, some -- but not all -- tech folks are seeking to teacher-proof the curriculum. They say things like, "If the student can't pass the standards, we can give them curriculum and modules to do." What this means is that kids who need additional support -- OR better yet, alternate approaches to learning such as Universal Design -- would be funneled to drill and skill/multiple choice modules. (The techies and data folks are setting up curriculum, standards, and assessment tagging systems to identify and track kids.) How does this help prepare kids for 21st Learning, Communication, and Collaboration? To flourish in the future, students will need to develop more than the skills needed to take online modules.
Another fundamental problem with this approach is that student data is being positioned to track students into lower expectations rather than build on their strengths and assets...Kids are not widgets. They are people who benefit from social interactions, apprenticeships, and experiences when learning standards-based curriculum.
Another fundamental problem with this approach is that student data is being positioned to track students into lower expectations rather than build on their strengths and assets...Kids are not widgets. They are people who benefit from social interactions, apprenticeships, and experiences when learning standards-based curriculum.
3
My daughter has been attending a Summit school for the last 2 years. She has been thriving in the Summit system. I am extremely grateful to Zuckerberg and Chan for their contributions to the Summit experience. This article takes a cynical view of tech leaders contributing to public education. I am grateful, and see the direct benefits of it. They are correct about the Summit system fostering a system of learning and work habits that will help children succeed in college and in the workplace.
I am raising a mentally ill 1st-grader who was born hooked on heroin and meth. Dreambox and a specialized school are absolutely essential to his success - and he is succeeding. He got lucky; he has access to everything he needs because he is at the BEGINNING of the incoming wave of drug-damaged American children. "Normal schooling" will, I guarantee you, be overwhelmed by a generation of terrified, hallucinating, socially problematic children. Making tech alternatives available to a lot of children may task us to the limits and barely leave us funding for undamaged children in "normal" public schools. Not having the alternatives available will shut the schoolrooms down under a steady blast of behaviors and problems outside our experience. And unless you are hypothesizing charter schools for drug-addicted kindergartners, you are hypothesizing charter schools at a very bad point in history.
2
I have always thought that a major benefit of public education is the personal interaction between students, with each other, and with the teachers. Being in front of a computer screen takes away from this interaction. This type of system seems more like pumping out a unit instead of making a well rounded individual. Let college be the time when they focus on honing skills.
11
Remember what happened to 'Shane' when he interacted with other people.
Education bureaucrats have been experimenting on children in the US for the past 60 years. The Common Core is just the latest example of an experiment at reinventing the wheel in education, with millions of children coming out lost and confused in the process.
At least the tech billionaires are willing to end a failed experiment and change direction before another generation of children graduates not knowing how to count. Can't say the same about the bureaucrats.
At least the tech billionaires are willing to end a failed experiment and change direction before another generation of children graduates not knowing how to count. Can't say the same about the bureaucrats.
2
I'm truly surprised at all the angst about these various initiatives. At a time when we have a Sec. of Education who seems hellbent on dismantling our public school systems, it is refreshing to see successful individuals channeling effort, thought, and resources into educational ideas to help our school systems advance. Not every model will work in all environments, but at least they are trying. good grief people - there is no such thing as standing still. We either progress or we loose ground. There is no stasis.
3
If the goal were truly to improve education, rather than to generate a generation of obedient, limited-vision employees, these billionaires would not be focusing inside the existing "box" of school systems. They'd be directing their efforts to expand early childhood work. It is impossible for anyone truly interested in education to remain ignorant of the extensive neuroscientific and empirical evidence showing that support for brain development during those very early years, before a child enters our school system, is the single most effective strategy for ensuring productive adulthood, including especially self-sufficiency and greater likelihood of meaningful participation in civic life. These tech folks' choice to ignore those facts, and focus instead on molding older children to work only within defined digital frameworks, seems to reflect more interest in producing unimaginative future employees than in truly helping to unleash individual potential.
17
Amen. It is very difficult if not impossible for students suffering developmental delays and social emotional issues to ever achieve what they were truly capable of. Its truly an uphill battle for these kids and they deserve better.
4
This is very encouraging. When you consider that many teachers and educators came of age in the early days of digital technology, as have many parents, government officials, and the majority of business and labor leaders, an adequate Future Vision may be absent from Today's Education. Few people apparently have seen the need to proclaim the dire necessity of "Teach for the Future, rather than the past!"
Let's also not lose track of the Arts and Humanities. Leadership skills are not necessarily honed in the STEM subject classrooms, but in the more-creative academic subjects, the playing fields, and in extracurricular activities.
The tie-in between Music and Math is well-known, Art and Philosophy (Logic and Ethics) burnish how we perceive concepts and ideas, and Critical Thinking can rise from anywhere. Lastly, Composition and Literature will enable today's students how to prepare to present the ideas and concepts of tomorrow.
But, it certainly is great to see today's forward-thinking business leaders lending that helping hand to Tomorrow's Leaders!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
Let's also not lose track of the Arts and Humanities. Leadership skills are not necessarily honed in the STEM subject classrooms, but in the more-creative academic subjects, the playing fields, and in extracurricular activities.
The tie-in between Music and Math is well-known, Art and Philosophy (Logic and Ethics) burnish how we perceive concepts and ideas, and Critical Thinking can rise from anywhere. Lastly, Composition and Literature will enable today's students how to prepare to present the ideas and concepts of tomorrow.
But, it certainly is great to see today's forward-thinking business leaders lending that helping hand to Tomorrow's Leaders!
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
4
As another commentator noted, the fear many should have is money being infused into education in order to prescribe a certain ideology, political view, etc onto a child during his/her developmental phase (see Huffington Post article on lesson plans created by ‘Youth Entrepreneurs’ –NGO financed by Koch Industries-which are used in public schools to promote the idea that having a minimum wage hurts workers and slows economic growth) when they are less able to question / look up the information they have been provided. It is important that teachers, parents, school administrators, and policy makers ensure that education is not corrupted by beliefs but instead is rooted in facts. Accordingly, I hope I see more oversight over where the money goes to and for what purpose.
While I might be biased, it would be much better for the American economy and the nation’s overall well-being if billionaires used their capital and rolodex of contacts to help mitigate the growing student loan crisis that burdens so many students going to undergrad and graduate school. Instead of buying homes/condos and investing more of our money into the economy we are straddled with high-interest loans/debt that take 10,20,30 years to pay off. Maybe setting up a loan network where loans are at 2 or 3% would be the right thing to do…shoot maybe even make education affordable as it was in the 60s/70s before the States began to de-invest in our future citizenry/education system. Oh I dream…
While I might be biased, it would be much better for the American economy and the nation’s overall well-being if billionaires used their capital and rolodex of contacts to help mitigate the growing student loan crisis that burdens so many students going to undergrad and graduate school. Instead of buying homes/condos and investing more of our money into the economy we are straddled with high-interest loans/debt that take 10,20,30 years to pay off. Maybe setting up a loan network where loans are at 2 or 3% would be the right thing to do…shoot maybe even make education affordable as it was in the 60s/70s before the States began to de-invest in our future citizenry/education system. Oh I dream…
10
Just because a person made a lot of money in business does not make him a teacher of children, just as a man who made a lot of money (?) in business does not make a decent president. Desperate school districts who are tempted to make a pact with the devil and experiment with their children's minds should think about it.
9
My concern with all this digitalized education is that it only seems concerned with science and math. How wil our kids learn to think in political or social ways. Where is the teaching of history, sociology, art, music, interpersonal relations, religion left if everybody learns to code and do math - which what I see coming out of the world of digital education. How do we as a nation learn how to take care of our communities, our educational systems, the needs of the disadvantaged, understand what bonds are for and to evaluate their usefulness, or even how our government actually works.? Please can we think about this in our efforts to make education work better.
16
By the time one graduates from High School, one should have a pretty good sense of the outlines of 4.5 billion years of Earth history, and no illusions that magic is real.
4
mac - some SF schools that got Benioff grants had kids creating and writing reports in math and science classes using iPads - and then doing oral presentations with their report visuals on a projector. So Language Arts (reading and writing) was included in the Math class in a way it never had been before. Everyone was delighted and all the teachers (even the English teachers) were pleased with the increased engagement and level of learning the first year of the Benioff grant at the schools in SF that I visited. Don't discount "digitalized education" until you have seen it in person. Of course tech is just a tool, but in the hands of the good teachers in SF public schools, it has already produced some great learning results.
These are innovative, well-intended efforts by the tech moguls, but it doesn't get at the root of the problem in public schools. As many of us who have kids in these schools know, students fall behind in math because teachers are so busy trying to discipline classrooms with kids who clearly don't belong in those classes: they are fighting, screaming, and generally disrupting the class on a daily basis. The teacher might spend 75% of a given day trying to keep order in the class, so only a quarter of the intended curriculum gets taught. The only way these tech advances help is that my kids can come home, login, and try to teach themselves the concepts, using tools designed by Zuckerberg or Hastings. Okay. But that's a perversion of what our public school system is supposed to be. I'm tired of our broken school system, and and ready to see it get torn down and rebuilt--but the tools described in this article are not addressing the real issues.
9
Amen. A large part of any "crisis" in education is the behavior of the students.
2
As a high school teacher for 20 years I completely agree with the behavior issue and always wonder how much more I could teach the students earning a C grade (the bulk of the class) had I not had to deal with the distractions from other students. This is after teaching at 6 different high schools in California & one in England until I finally found one which for the most part is not overcrowded and students are polite, respectful & want to learn. You are right that some students need to be in other classes and perhaps these computer-driven classes are the ones for the disruptive students or others who choose or do better in that format. Perhaps this tech method will be how we will regain a decent literacy rate among all high school graduates as well as college prep classes enrolled with students who are both academically & behaviorally prepared.
2
So, what are you suggesting by way of rebuild? Do you want more resources devoted to the disruptive kids who clearly need the most help or are you saying those kids should somehow be excluded to make things easier for your children?
Juxtapose this article against the one about giving away your billion. Especially the first gentleman quoted who realized that his success was partly genetic happenstance and good luck, for lack of a better term.
However, these tech billionaires are convinced they are geniuses. Somehow making a successful computer program that they think we need gives them incredible wisdom in their eyes.
Schools are not like tech companies where everyone sits in front a computer all day writing another program to make another billion. It's humans interacting. And sometimes that interaction is the most important as teachers serve as mentors, a visors, and pseudo parents. And sometimes that interaction is what makes or breaks a child's education. Not a machine that encourages them to play a game.
However, these tech billionaires are convinced they are geniuses. Somehow making a successful computer program that they think we need gives them incredible wisdom in their eyes.
Schools are not like tech companies where everyone sits in front a computer all day writing another program to make another billion. It's humans interacting. And sometimes that interaction is the most important as teachers serve as mentors, a visors, and pseudo parents. And sometimes that interaction is what makes or breaks a child's education. Not a machine that encourages them to play a game.
11
They have the power to change policy....welcome to the world of the Koch brothers...but surely with a better outcome.
2
I would not assume the outcome would be better. There are strong reasons to believe that handing over education to the tech lords is an absolute disaster in terms of the social, intellectual, and analytical skills that kids actually need.
6
In math, science and technology, this is a great thing. Educators do need to think out of the box. How can it be a bad thing to have the "goal of getting every public school in the United States to teach computer science"?
However, educators provide the individualized, human support in child development and the artistic aspects of learning, which has been shown to be a fundamental aspect of intellect and intelligence. I also think this balance produces much more well rounded human beings.
The key here is to achieve a good balance - our current public schools for the most part are not working - we have to face the reality. Our kids are out-ranked in math, science and technology at the grade school level by other countries by far - so I see these magnates assistance to be a good thing. Schools should think different and adjust their teaching to blend the best-of-breed.
Betsy's approach to school choice at the cost of public schools is not the answer. The majority of our children attend public schools.
We are very fortunate to live in a society that these titans of industry care enough to contribute in their own way. Now the challenge is to harness that and blend it with other great things that educators provide for our children's development.
However, educators provide the individualized, human support in child development and the artistic aspects of learning, which has been shown to be a fundamental aspect of intellect and intelligence. I also think this balance produces much more well rounded human beings.
The key here is to achieve a good balance - our current public schools for the most part are not working - we have to face the reality. Our kids are out-ranked in math, science and technology at the grade school level by other countries by far - so I see these magnates assistance to be a good thing. Schools should think different and adjust their teaching to blend the best-of-breed.
Betsy's approach to school choice at the cost of public schools is not the answer. The majority of our children attend public schools.
We are very fortunate to live in a society that these titans of industry care enough to contribute in their own way. Now the challenge is to harness that and blend it with other great things that educators provide for our children's development.
2
Americans equate wealth with brilliance. A successful entrepreneur or executive is the new messiah. Knowledge is to be given to us by the "brilliant", not the "intellectual elite". Dissent, knowledge and truth are under assault. What is the point to teaching kids to think critically in the Trump world order, when the messiahs really just need coders and a bit of cheap labor? Scary stuff.
6
One might ask these successful entrepreneurs where they send their own children to school and where they encourage their employees to send their children to school. It's not likely to be places where they support these interventions.
16
Teacher here: Do these billionaires ever ask teachers or educational experts about best practices in education? Do they realize that people devote their careers to researching and understanding education?
Give me an overhead projector, a xerox machine, and a comfortable, well-managed school and I can get most children to grade-level or beyond in the skills and content matter that I have been trained to teach and have been teaching for fifteen years. No iPads or software required. I do need a living wage and a supportive administration.
Give me an overhead projector, a xerox machine, and a comfortable, well-managed school and I can get most children to grade-level or beyond in the skills and content matter that I have been trained to teach and have been teaching for fifteen years. No iPads or software required. I do need a living wage and a supportive administration.
34
Hallelujah!
The billionaires aim to create classrooms that would cater to mini-versions of themselves: highly ambitious, well-read, curious. The challenge of teaching is not catering to the these types. They are easy to inspire, motivate, teach (or is it called facilitating now). Most still need a real person with real knowledge leading a dynamic classroom. Computers are not the answer. Highly gifted. well-paid teachers are the answer.
14
While grant funding is fantastic and should be lauded, I am appalled at the complete absence of ethical considerations employed in these alternative educational endeavors:
Any researcher is constrained by ethical limits in their work (i.e., whom might this harm and, in light of the potential for harm, is this a warranted risk?). The seemingly ad hoc imposition of new curricula and methods on our children should raise much more than eyebrows. Kids only get to experience their education once--there is a decades-old education research literature that should be the first stop before turning entire school districts into hamster cages for corporate interests. I am not so cynical to assert that there are no positive intentions in these enterprises. However, to rush headlong into crash programs that take no stock of the potential for permanently altering the educational experience of children...this is the height of arrogance.
Where are our career educational researchers? The collegiate research mill is so consumed with getting published in journals, that instead of accomplished minds from the Ivory Tower guiding districts through what the research shows is best practice, we have moneyed interests of questionable intent with zero caution upending classrooms. For good or ill?
Any researcher is constrained by ethical limits in their work (i.e., whom might this harm and, in light of the potential for harm, is this a warranted risk?). The seemingly ad hoc imposition of new curricula and methods on our children should raise much more than eyebrows. Kids only get to experience their education once--there is a decades-old education research literature that should be the first stop before turning entire school districts into hamster cages for corporate interests. I am not so cynical to assert that there are no positive intentions in these enterprises. However, to rush headlong into crash programs that take no stock of the potential for permanently altering the educational experience of children...this is the height of arrogance.
Where are our career educational researchers? The collegiate research mill is so consumed with getting published in journals, that instead of accomplished minds from the Ivory Tower guiding districts through what the research shows is best practice, we have moneyed interests of questionable intent with zero caution upending classrooms. For good or ill?
2
Follow the money. Money drives the agenda, especially in tax starved times. While this story focuses in the tech influence of the Foundation money, the real story is that the political agenda in education is driven by Foundation money. In the 1990's the Carnegie and Ford Foundations provided about $100 million a year in funding for school related issues and teacher training, and they helped set the agenda. By the early 2000's the Gates, Broad, and Walton Foundations were putting out about $500 million a year, focusing on charters, privatization efforts, and value-added teacher evaluations. This influx of big new money shifted the agenda, especially as the Bush and Obama administrations largely embraced the same priorities. Now we see the natural extension of the privatization agenda shift, embodied by Secretary of Education DeVos. Anyone who believes that public schools are a fundamental aspect of our democracy needs to recognize that this type of new money, in favor of privatization and held out like a carrot to tax starved school systems, must also come with public accountability measures. No one elected the Foundations to determine, or destroy, the future of public education.
4
"And in more than 100 schools nationwide, Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s chief, is testing one of his latest big ideas: software that puts children in charge of their own learning, recasting their teachers as facilitators and mentors."
This is all very reassuring. Computer and movie rental salesmen, bringing computers and movie-rental algorithms into the classroom. I missed the part of the article describing what, if anything, these so-called philanthropists know about child development, or the science of education. I'm guessing zero.
How many of these self-appointed masters of the universe can play a musical instrument, paint a picture, write a poem or converse in another language? How many can reason on their feet, as opposed to asking a machine to crunch some numbers? How many see a value in wild places, wholly independent of any ability of such places to generate revenue?
"Children in charge of their own learning." Such a clever way to describe computers, instead of elders, now put in charge of learning. This is how children learn best, right? Cut off from human contact, staring at screens. A thinking parent would pull his/her children out of those schools, and pronto. Where are the voters? The parents? The community? Who has let the barbarians through the gate?
This is all very reassuring. Computer and movie rental salesmen, bringing computers and movie-rental algorithms into the classroom. I missed the part of the article describing what, if anything, these so-called philanthropists know about child development, or the science of education. I'm guessing zero.
How many of these self-appointed masters of the universe can play a musical instrument, paint a picture, write a poem or converse in another language? How many can reason on their feet, as opposed to asking a machine to crunch some numbers? How many see a value in wild places, wholly independent of any ability of such places to generate revenue?
"Children in charge of their own learning." Such a clever way to describe computers, instead of elders, now put in charge of learning. This is how children learn best, right? Cut off from human contact, staring at screens. A thinking parent would pull his/her children out of those schools, and pronto. Where are the voters? The parents? The community? Who has let the barbarians through the gate?
30
I am not sure I understand your issue with a mathematics specialist designing computers, but since I look up things people argue about on comments, I went to Wikipedia. Yes, Zuckerberg fences, knows Chinese, and quotes classical poetry. If that makes you feel better, good.
In the meantime, my kid does Dreambox for homework and plays afterwards - I monitor. The rewards games are in a separate section with separate music; he cannot sneak away from an assignment even if I am washing dishes. As a Liberal Arts graduate, I expect him to study music, art, and languages too - but not in math class. If Betsy DeVos removes all funding for his school, I will actually have to pay for a Dreambox subscription. My heart bleeds for kids whose families cannot do the same.
In the meantime, my kid does Dreambox for homework and plays afterwards - I monitor. The rewards games are in a separate section with separate music; he cannot sneak away from an assignment even if I am washing dishes. As a Liberal Arts graduate, I expect him to study music, art, and languages too - but not in math class. If Betsy DeVos removes all funding for his school, I will actually have to pay for a Dreambox subscription. My heart bleeds for kids whose families cannot do the same.
1
The lead manager for a child's education should be their parents, not a corporatist mogul with a truckload of money. I believe more and more that education should be decentralized, give parents a voucher and let them choose the best school for their child. Nobody has a better interest of their children than their parents.
1
Public schools allow children to get out from under awful parents.
Cliff - Vouchers may sound appealing, but they don't work. Here are the results of a recent study. "In mathematics,” they found, “voucher students who transfer to private schools experienced *significant losses* in achievement.” They also saw *no improvement *in reading." Here is the link:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/upshot/dismal-results-from-vouchers-s...
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/23/upshot/dismal-results-from-vouchers-s...
This is great reporting on how technology is being used in the classroom. Learning continues at home, though, and without extending internet access and laptops into every student's home, this technology will only deepen the divide between students who have and students who have not. Regarding prepping students to work in software dev, e.g., "'I would like to give our kids the opportunity, when they graduate, to see themselves working at those tech companies,' Mr. Lee recalled telling Mr. Benioff," a student cannot become a competent, hireable software developer via 5 45-min sessions per week in school, even if it's for the 4 years of high school. Rather, a student with this career goal after high school has to immerse her/himself in software dev in school and out for at least the last two years of high school. I would ask the chiefs of software in this article to address students' home environments when they think about gearing up the classroom.
If the public education system had not relentlessly been demonized and marginalized by people like Betsy Devoss and the GOP in general there would be no crisis in the education system today. If teachers were revered instead of being reviled and demeaned that would be a good start at fixing the education system and while you are at it pay them decently and treat them with respect. That coupled with adequate funding so that teachers have the materials and classroom sizes to properly teach and mentor the next generation, the generation that will be tasked with fixing the mess your country is in.
14
Oh dear. Why don't the billionaires of Silicon Valley just donate their computers to schools as infrastructure and keep out of the learning part of the project? If they don't want to give money with no strings attached, let them donate computers and let schools use them in labs or as they see fit.
7
tdb - notice this Times article says "But Mr. Benioff’s “think bigger” mandate .. established a Principal’s Innovation Fund, which awards annual *unrestricted* grants of $100,000 to the principal at each of the district’s 21 middle and K-8 schools." Wow - cash and principal (and teacher) control of how it is spent.
Benioff's firm does not make hardware - or educational software. And his charity is just donating CASH and letting the schools figure out how to spend it on "the learning part". As you think they should. Teachers i have met in SF schools that have gotten these grants have been able to design improved teaching approaches, some using technology as appropriate. They are delighted with the difference it has made in their students ability to learn.
Not all donations are as useful as the Benioff donation, but you should certainly not complain about his approach to supporting public schools. It is making a huge difference in SF - especially in the schools with the the most challenging kids.
Benioff's firm does not make hardware - or educational software. And his charity is just donating CASH and letting the schools figure out how to spend it on "the learning part". As you think they should. Teachers i have met in SF schools that have gotten these grants have been able to design improved teaching approaches, some using technology as appropriate. They are delighted with the difference it has made in their students ability to learn.
Not all donations are as useful as the Benioff donation, but you should certainly not complain about his approach to supporting public schools. It is making a huge difference in SF - especially in the schools with the the most challenging kids.
Its great that these innovators are trying to tackle the problems we face with education in our country. Unfortunately, the blame for the bloated bureaucracy and failing public schools in most areas lie solely at the feet of the liberal lawmakers, educators, and school administrators they so willingly support. In a free market educational system where people had choices of schools and paid for their own schooling, ideas like this would take off. unfortunately, our public school system has been institutionalized and socialized to the point that teachers and unions have free reign to do and act and teach however they choose. It will be very hard if not impossible to change this. That is why more well off people pay their taxes so other peoples kids can go to public schools, and then also pay extra to send their kids to private schools.
The best public school systems are federally run and funded by broad-based taxation. The typical American school board is a collection of amateurs operating at a NYC co-op board's level of competence.
2
These moguls are not educators. They may think that they are helping children but it sounds as if they are dictating the terms of the help and the learning that they are dispensing. Public schools are supposed to serve the public, not the moguls with money. If they want to improve the schools and help people have better lives why not start to help parents and others where they need it most: making enough money to be able to concentrate on having a good life, on helping themselves and their children, on access to a good education for all, not just the schools they select?
The biggest problem in our school systems is the lack of a comprehensive curriculum across all the states, one that doesn't cater to Texas or California, or fails by not teaching children science, math, reading, and critical thinking. You don't need tons of technology to teach those skills. You need good teachers, safe schools, and children who arrive in school ready and able to learn. You don't need to have every student in college. We need to bring back apprenticeships, vocational education, and on the job training.
The biggest problem in our school systems is the lack of a comprehensive curriculum across all the states, one that doesn't cater to Texas or California, or fails by not teaching children science, math, reading, and critical thinking. You don't need tons of technology to teach those skills. You need good teachers, safe schools, and children who arrive in school ready and able to learn. You don't need to have every student in college. We need to bring back apprenticeships, vocational education, and on the job training.
7
Isn't it bad enough that the billionaire class is running politics and government? Do we need to hand over control of public education to them, too? I hope that wasn't too subtle.
Private charity tilts the playing field away from democratic values in favor of personal preferences. San Francisco is already rich enough to have fine public schools. Teachers can't afford to live in the city because millionaires keep bidding up the cost of housing.
Charity is fine if you want your name on a building. But don't undercut the professionals by throwing a wrench in the gears. Government has to help everybody not just the six blocks around Apple or Google headquarters.
Private charity tilts the playing field away from democratic values in favor of personal preferences. San Francisco is already rich enough to have fine public schools. Teachers can't afford to live in the city because millionaires keep bidding up the cost of housing.
Charity is fine if you want your name on a building. But don't undercut the professionals by throwing a wrench in the gears. Government has to help everybody not just the six blocks around Apple or Google headquarters.
8
They clearly want to own many pieces of what government does on a non-profit basis, for profit, and they are willing to invest in politicians to abrogate government functions to them.
2
All that technology and money, San Francisco still has one of the
Poorest performing school system in the country. No one who can
afford private schools send their children to public school.
Poorest performing school system in the country. No one who can
afford private schools send their children to public school.
4
MAG - SF actually has the best results of any large city in CA - better even than San Diego!
Since San Diego is in the NAEP large cities program, it is clear that San Diego and SF are actually doing quite a bit better than the national average for US cities. Only one city in the US (in the NAEP large cities group) was significantly higher for 8th grade scores.
Here is the info;
https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/dst2015/pdf/2...
Go visit a SF city school on a volunteer "read to the kids" day and you will be impressed.
Since San Diego is in the NAEP large cities program, it is clear that San Diego and SF are actually doing quite a bit better than the national average for US cities. Only one city in the US (in the NAEP large cities group) was significantly higher for 8th grade scores.
Here is the info;
https://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/dst2015/pdf/2...
Go visit a SF city school on a volunteer "read to the kids" day and you will be impressed.
Despite their stated commitment to public education, Silicon Valley's billionaires have fought mightily against the property and income taxes that comprise public education's primary support. It's hard to trust their good intentions when they are unwilling to support schools' basic needs in this way.
Any article on education that discusses Mr. Zuckerberg without recounting his expensive, failed investments in the Newark Public Schools is missing key information. We have ample evidence that the Facebook ethos of "move fast and break things" is absolutely unsuited to education already. Similarly, Mr. Hastings has spent millions of dollars supporting ballot initiatives that defund public schools and has stated his opposition to democratic, local control of schools. These are documented facts that should have been noted here.
Any article on education that discusses Mr. Zuckerberg without recounting his expensive, failed investments in the Newark Public Schools is missing key information. We have ample evidence that the Facebook ethos of "move fast and break things" is absolutely unsuited to education already. Similarly, Mr. Hastings has spent millions of dollars supporting ballot initiatives that defund public schools and has stated his opposition to democratic, local control of schools. These are documented facts that should have been noted here.
39
The basic idea of tech innovators as the geniuses who will save the American education system is ten or twenty years old. Bill Gates tried it -- with notable failures that are rarely acknowledged or analyzed) and so have other wealthy and inspired people. The writer was dazzled by the Zuckerberg and the others and failed to see the hubris fueling this.
I like that they are looking at innovation but they are only narrowly applying it. Their focus is on what they know; the tools they are marketing. (Emphasis on "marketing.") That's understandable but short-sighted.
I once taught an intro darkroom photography that competed with my intro to digital photo. To my surprise, darkroom was far more popular and the students who came out of it were much more advanced than the digital kids. The darkroom students had to struggle harder, collaborated more and literally construct meaning. In digital, they skimmed the surface and interacted less with me and the other students.
Success in education come through multiple means. Innovation is important. Technology is a great pencil. Autonomy is key for kids and teachers. And, so is involving the community of parents, teachers, neighbors and tech billionaires in creative efforts that fit the specific community. All of this is much messier than creating and selling an algorithm.
I like that they are looking at innovation but they are only narrowly applying it. Their focus is on what they know; the tools they are marketing. (Emphasis on "marketing.") That's understandable but short-sighted.
I once taught an intro darkroom photography that competed with my intro to digital photo. To my surprise, darkroom was far more popular and the students who came out of it were much more advanced than the digital kids. The darkroom students had to struggle harder, collaborated more and literally construct meaning. In digital, they skimmed the surface and interacted less with me and the other students.
Success in education come through multiple means. Innovation is important. Technology is a great pencil. Autonomy is key for kids and teachers. And, so is involving the community of parents, teachers, neighbors and tech billionaires in creative efforts that fit the specific community. All of this is much messier than creating and selling an algorithm.
7
In June 2026 I retired from teaching high school art and English for 30 years. The year before a Chromebook cart - 30 computers was wheeled into my English classroom. I said, "I don't want that." Too bad. I was told to put the kids on a reading program, short little stories and bios that students then responded to. Boring for them and for me. Imagine looking at screens in every classroom all day, every day for 12 years. I saw that the role of the teacher was indeed to be " no longer classroom leader, but helpmate," or facilitator, or babysitter. So, I said to myself, they don't need me anymore, and left. I visited my school a month ago. What a bunch of disillusioned teachers, even the young ones. Everyone I talked to said they can't wait to retire. And, the kids? A lot of glazed eyes and dull stares. The corporatists have won the battle for the brains of our youth. The Google coup has succeeded. I could write about what education should be, but I'll leave that for someone else. I'm engaged at the moment in a real book, real pages I can turn, that I borrowed from one of those quaint old neighborhood libraries.
18
Computer technology is just one tool of many, and they provide companies a motherlode of data- data not available to child, parent or school. Of course, the users (schools, teachers, students, parents) are required to 'sign' User's Agreements-- who is benefiting from those? The 'hidden' agendas in curriculum are unavoidable regardless of origins, and we've already allowed a variety of corporateers to determine the scope and sequence of most of our public school instruction. Along with the ability to gather, monitor and sell the data and products of the students, these computer programs are DESIGNED to minimize the role of the HUMAN interaction between child and teacher. Why is the reduction of teacher role considered such a NEED to improve educational outcomes? Why don't we acknowledge what has caused such disparities in education: the Race to the Top-- it's name trumpets the problem--everyone RACING--to the TOP. An idiotic ideal for education-- along with No Child Left Behind (with no regard for differences in needs-- as if we should ALL be aiming for med school. These mandates helped create the perceived need for 'niche' schools, which we call 'charter'...ironically 'leaving behind' the 'unlucky'.) Teachers are forced to focus on quantified outcomes. Excellent programs have been successful in schools for generations, and overall, public schools are amazing power-houses. The success comes from the relationships between students and teachers. Put your money there.
7
I like to see these moguls invest more in the economically blighted areas of our country where these skills might help resurrect those communities and entice companies to set up shop there.
Teaching code isn't a bad thing, but the money should also enhance all types of education, especially those disciplines that produce critical thinking.
And how about giving hiring bonuses to teachers like these tech companies give to their new recruits? Or possibly paying for tuition debt if a college grad goes into teaching?
Teaching code isn't a bad thing, but the money should also enhance all types of education, especially those disciplines that produce critical thinking.
And how about giving hiring bonuses to teachers like these tech companies give to their new recruits? Or possibly paying for tuition debt if a college grad goes into teaching?
8
Sherrie - Zuckerberg tried to help poor old blighted Newark - but he did that the wrong way. Hopefully he has learned something from that mistake.
But it should be understood that if you code, you for sure learn problem solving and critical thinking.
Paying off teachers' tuition debt is a great idea for a philanthropist to focus on.
But it should be understood that if you code, you for sure learn problem solving and critical thinking.
Paying off teachers' tuition debt is a great idea for a philanthropist to focus on.
With government at every level refusing to adequately fund our education system it is heartening to know that SOMETHING is being done to attempt to improve the educational experience. We are falling further behind other countries with our educational system at a time when this is critical to our future. I congratulate these philanthropic efforts and only wish government would do its part.
5
Mr. Benioff "urged the superintendent to imagine 'what nirvana would look like' in his schools, if money were no object." I'm a long-time public school teacher in New York City. To me, nirvana would have nothing to do with technology. It would include unlimited social-service resources, including counseling for children and their families (together and separately), homework help, mentoring outside of school (not necessarily academically based), help with improving attendance--including properly addressing students' chronic health problems like asthma. My students who come to school prepared and healthy every day, with emotional problems addressed, are learning, no matter what technological opportunities they get. My students who are unprepared, lacking in food or medicine, with emotional issues inadequately addressed, are not going to learn no matter how many apps or devices they are provided with.
108
Same here in Dallas.
We need an influx of school psychologists to treat both children and their parents, not another software program.
We need reading interventionists and 1-1 math tutors.
We need much smaller classes and maybe 1 standardized test a year instead of the 10 we subject the kids to now. Imagine hearing that you failed every couple of weeks...when you're 13.
Kids cannot learn until their psychological and physical needs are met.
We need an influx of school psychologists to treat both children and their parents, not another software program.
We need reading interventionists and 1-1 math tutors.
We need much smaller classes and maybe 1 standardized test a year instead of the 10 we subject the kids to now. Imagine hearing that you failed every couple of weeks...when you're 13.
Kids cannot learn until their psychological and physical needs are met.
9
"Nirvana" is the Buddhist concept of ultimate release from a cycle of rebirth by achievement of philosophical perfection. In other words, it is oblivion. In reality, you only have to live once to get there.
Fabulous insight. It's what HeadStart tried to establish...health needs, family involvement.... good ideas.
1
Part of education is having good instructors, and another part is interest in learning. To a degree, technology can help with both: computers enable interactive learning that can adapt to the student's developing abilities like a good instructor, and also engage student's interest through tailored response to student input.
However, cultivating a reliance upon Google searches or Wikipedia or other on-line "resources" are preparatory to simple brain washing and making us into easily led consumers of vested interests.
These dubious influences are present whatever is done in schools. Exposure to technology should be provided along with savvy about its downside.
However, cultivating a reliance upon Google searches or Wikipedia or other on-line "resources" are preparatory to simple brain washing and making us into easily led consumers of vested interests.
These dubious influences are present whatever is done in schools. Exposure to technology should be provided along with savvy about its downside.
9
The other students matter most of all. One doesn't learn the most by being at the head of the class.
Students need to learn that there are often many hidden agendas in the selective presetantion of information.
1
let them eat algorithms! more bromides and nostrums from the 1%. why can't they just pay their taxes, get out of the way, and furnish public educators with adequate resources to do their jobs properly? clean drinking water, nutritious food, and decent salaries for their teachers and parents are more valuable to our students than algorithms. the cancerous trump presidency ought to be proof enough that there is no substitute for the socialization and empathy inherent to our traditional methods of public education.
45
Andrew Carnegie funded libraries all across the US. Many are still standing and in use. He did not tell the libraries what books to stock. He did not tell people what books to read. He did not tell librarians how to do their jobs.
Private funding for the public good is a core of philanthropy. Believing you not only can but should tell others how to go about their lives because you made a pile of dough is a core of narcissism.
Private funding for the public good is a core of philanthropy. Believing you not only can but should tell others how to go about their lives because you made a pile of dough is a core of narcissism.
160
Wish I could recommend your comment x1,000!
I wish I could do more than merely click "recommend" to endorse this comment. You hit the nail on the head when you pointed out that Carnegie did not tell librarians how to do their jobs.
Collaboration between schools and their techie benefactors -- sure! Teachers should be humble enough and brave enough to learn new approaches. (And they usually are.) But a takeover by techies of school policy and curriculum? That way lies Brave New World.
Collaboration between schools and their techie benefactors -- sure! Teachers should be humble enough and brave enough to learn new approaches. (And they usually are.) But a takeover by techies of school policy and curriculum? That way lies Brave New World.
30
A prescient article. While it states that no harm has been done, we should
be wary if this philanthropist supported model of education may be abused
by an unscrupulous individual.
There is one cynical point I would like to make. Students nowadays
are overburdened with facts. If they focused on Math and English,
they would learn to communicate well, and also understand science
through mathematics rather than useless coding jobs.
The cynical point I am making, that the above is an upper-class
curriculum; whereas coding is an upper-middle class occupation
nowadays. Do the elite want you to compete with their own children
for prestigious positions.
Yes art and painting is also important for student's spirits, but it does
not need to be graded.
be wary if this philanthropist supported model of education may be abused
by an unscrupulous individual.
There is one cynical point I would like to make. Students nowadays
are overburdened with facts. If they focused on Math and English,
they would learn to communicate well, and also understand science
through mathematics rather than useless coding jobs.
The cynical point I am making, that the above is an upper-class
curriculum; whereas coding is an upper-middle class occupation
nowadays. Do the elite want you to compete with their own children
for prestigious positions.
Yes art and painting is also important for student's spirits, but it does
not need to be graded.
3
Our TECHNOLOGY HAS EVOLVED much more RAPIDLY THAN OUR BIOLOGY possibly can. These brilliant billionaires fail to take this basic science into account when proposing that humans learn completely via technology. HUMANS ARE PHYSICAL BEINGS--not technological beings. Humans learn through the senses--not just the intellect. Humans learn best by experiencing things, not just reading about/seeing them on screens.
4
We are just like the computers we make in the sense that we are entirely software driven through an experience-based development process.
1
Gigi- not one of these rich folks was "proposing that humans learn completely via technology. " The Netflix guy said he found some math software that would hep kids and made it available to the teachers. They can use it as much or as little as they like.
However, Zuckerber might think kids could learn mostly from software - but the teachers he is supporting at Summit said they would be focusing on getting the kids high level skills after they learn some other stuff from the software.
Tech is a too, but not a silver bullet.
However, Zuckerber might think kids could learn mostly from software - but the teachers he is supporting at Summit said they would be focusing on getting the kids high level skills after they learn some other stuff from the software.
Tech is a too, but not a silver bullet.
I don't recall seeing Mark Zuckerberg's name on the ballot...
8
We may well see it on the ballot in three years...
I seem to remember one entrepreneur who found college irrelevant, so he dropped out to found his tech company, and now encourages other people to do that. He also gave massive amounts of money to elect our incompetent, ethically challenged President. What we need is more citizens with narrow technical educations who know nothing about historical developments, moral philosophy, art and literature, or other human endeavors that over time have contributed to improving the lot of humanity.
22
They believe destruction is creative.
2
I'm a Aerospace engineer for forty years now and it's baffled me why shop and auto mechanics classes are gone from High School but has not been replaced by Programming. Believe me, I don't love computers - they're not the saviors of mankind. I think it's better to go into the woods. But still it makes sense to me that basic computing would be taught in High School.
8
Teach the NATURE of computers and computing, not merely coding. Coding is unnecessary to understanding.
I did take shop in high school. It didn't teach me much, except for getting a crude basic understanding of what it means to build something with your hands. Many years later, I built a house -- actually I was the general contractor and did the roofing and electricity. Later, I plumbed our hot-water solar system. Maybe those shop classes gave me just enough confidence to take on these enormous tasks.
I did take shop in high school. It didn't teach me much, except for getting a crude basic understanding of what it means to build something with your hands. Many years later, I built a house -- actually I was the general contractor and did the roofing and electricity. Later, I plumbed our hot-water solar system. Maybe those shop classes gave me just enough confidence to take on these enormous tasks.
9
One doesn't understand how computers actually work unless one has learned a processor's own language at the assembly language level that describes the binary operations it can perform.
1
Hey, no one learns that stuff anymore. It's all PERL, PHP, or Ruby these days. My own first coding was in machine language (no assembler available).
2
This is why we need rigorous standardized testing--if these innovations increase skills and learning, by all means, carry on! If they don't, a responsible school system will get rid of them.
As a HS English teacher, I assure you: online learning DOES NOT WORK. Humans learn from humans, not computers. Especially for reading and writing.
As a HS English teacher, I assure you: online learning DOES NOT WORK. Humans learn from humans, not computers. Especially for reading and writing.
11
Much human communication is nonverbal and subliminal.
3
Steve: Your point is a good one. The tools we use modify how we approach informing ourselves and making decisions. Reliance upon Google and Wikipedia can become part of our process, as you say, subliminal.
2
The arrogance of these self-centered 'reformers,' like Ms. Tavenner of Summit, is on display for all to see. "Those are the habits of success that we are trying to instill in kids that simply don’t get instilled in the normal system.” No educator talks so disparagingly of either traditional or progressive classrooms and their teachers. As a middle and junior high teacher for twenty years, I can say with confidence that Ms. Tavenner isn't much of a learner herself if she's so rigid and dismissive.
27
One tends to learn more from failures than successes.
3
I must concur. It's the arrogance that sinks so many of these efforts, and it's why I focus so narrowly on science (STEM) education. After 20 years in this field, I still am learning -- and I began with a doctorate in chemistry from a top university and am a former university professor. Education is tough. No silver bullets exist out there. Gains are hard-won through patience, endurance, and a humble attitude.
7
I find a lot to admire in these donors: their optimism, their altruism, their cleverness, their commitment to America's next generation. What I hope is that they temper these qualities with humility and with patience. Humility, because teachers are professionals with vast experience and knowledge, and their expertise deserves deference. Patience, because teaching children is a bit of a slog. There is no "hack" for some things. Some things just require human beings, face to face, working day in and day out for years, reminding kids again and again and again to say please and thank you, showing them over and over how to make a letter "e", helping them explore their world.
16
Evidently many billionaires feel compelled to demonstrate superior public policy than the political system achieves, with these philanthropic works enabled by the magnitude of their riches, and foregone tax revenues.
1
"[Code.org's] argument is twofold: Students would benefit from these classes, and companies need more programmers."
This argument is complete nonsense. Sure, some students may benefit, but would they benefit even more from a different class? Where's the answer to that question in this rush to turn our students into coding machines? Many students are not temperamentally suited to writing code. Few have the many traits necessary for a career in software. We absolutely must, however, add to our curricula units that address understanding the nature of computers and computing. This addition does not require entire new courses.
The "lack" of programmers is a scam, all smoke and mirrors. Coding productivity has a range of around 100:1 from the best to the least effective programmers (and may be greater if you count bugs, poor design, and other factors). Finding those with software talent and training them will result in much better outcomes for companies than force-feeding coding down the throats of every student.
Ms. Singer does us all a favor by illuminating the Babel of billionaire approaches. They cannot all be equally great, and none might work out in the end.
I work in this arena myself providing online science lessons that use real experiments and hands-on measurement, a patented approach to learning. When it's used in schools (over 300 so far), it works to increase test scores and student engagement.
This argument is complete nonsense. Sure, some students may benefit, but would they benefit even more from a different class? Where's the answer to that question in this rush to turn our students into coding machines? Many students are not temperamentally suited to writing code. Few have the many traits necessary for a career in software. We absolutely must, however, add to our curricula units that address understanding the nature of computers and computing. This addition does not require entire new courses.
The "lack" of programmers is a scam, all smoke and mirrors. Coding productivity has a range of around 100:1 from the best to the least effective programmers (and may be greater if you count bugs, poor design, and other factors). Finding those with software talent and training them will result in much better outcomes for companies than force-feeding coding down the throats of every student.
Ms. Singer does us all a favor by illuminating the Babel of billionaire approaches. They cannot all be equally great, and none might work out in the end.
I work in this arena myself providing online science lessons that use real experiments and hands-on measurement, a patented approach to learning. When it's used in schools (over 300 so far), it works to increase test scores and student engagement.
3
Financially helping cash strapped schools is a good thing -- running approved experiments using America's children without ethics oversight and without any regulation of what, when, and to whom is a very bad thing.
Experimenting on and with human children, must be very closely supervised by disinterested experts in education and ethics.
Being a billionaire means that you're rich, lucky, and maybe smart in some narrow band of endeavor. It does not give you the right the experiment on our kids.
Experimenting on and with human children, must be very closely supervised by disinterested experts in education and ethics.
Being a billionaire means that you're rich, lucky, and maybe smart in some narrow band of endeavor. It does not give you the right the experiment on our kids.
37
Some also spend plenty to mislead the public about climate change.
3
While I agree with this sentiment, it ignores the fact that every single edtech learning product that comes out is experimenting with our children. For better or worse, that's how we achieve progress in education. The "new math" years ago was one such experiment -- without the technology. The history of education is rife with such experiments, and many were failures.
It's a nice sentiment but is hardly practical. Even schools must live in the real world.
It's a nice sentiment but is hardly practical. Even schools must live in the real world.
3
My own mathematical education was somewhat mangled by moving to another school system every two years until I was 12. Each system had some different experimental method to represent and teach numbers, variables, and operations.
1
What if kids read books of their choosing most of the day and then had conversations with peers and teachers about those books? Would we worry about too much "page time" or turning them into antisocial "book nerds"? Would we panic about an outbreak of myopia? And where is the proof that books help kids learn? We've had books in schools for centuries and look at the horrible state of education. Seems objections to technology in the classroom are mostly aesthetic. I agree books do smell better. But just like books don't replace teachers, neither will technology. Just like sitting in the corner reading a book all day doesn't make you a sociapath, neither does technology. Keeping teachers from developing ways to harness technology for learning will however limit opportunities for the least advantaged kids.
2
Reading books is a different cognitive task than reading on a screen. I won't detail the differences, but there are plenty of replicated studies showing the different cognitive benefits of learning by reading books v. learning by 'screen'. And there WERE people in the 1700's and 1800's who were greatly disturbed by children who spent their time reading. It WAS considered dangerous for many. A child who spent too much time alone with a book was likely to grow into a socially inadequate adult, lost in their own ideas. (You're wrong to say that books haven't shown any positive affect on education, but you're right that it can and does cause myopia, but reading from a screen can also cause similar eye strain!) Both screen and page have their benefits and problems. AND-- there's even an argument that an excellent education could be had with NEITHER!
1
I believe the state of public education, the failing state, coincides with the failing state of reading. Surveys show that fewer people read books, and fewer numbers of books, every year. Studies show that even university students are not reading books. The numbers of functionally illiterate Americans is on the rise. There is an even bigger problem than computers as teachers in the classroom in this country. The anti-intellectualism, anti-science, anti-fact based news, and out of reach cost of an university education is troubling.
2
@ETPercyintheBoat: you can cause eye-strain from "reading too much" but not myopia.
Myopia is caused by the size of your eyeball -- if it is too short, you are far sighted, too long you are nearsighted. This is a condition of birth and not caused by reading or anything else.
Myopia is caused by the size of your eyeball -- if it is too short, you are far sighted, too long you are nearsighted. This is a condition of birth and not caused by reading or anything else.
A billion kudos to Mr. Benioff for focusing on the only thing that matters (student success), consulting the experts who know best (educators), and addressing their greatest need (funding). So many "fixes" for education do the opposite - and in reverse order.
1
The use of technology to advance education can be helpful, although it isn't certain it will be. For example, computers can make education interactive and therefore more engaging than a textbook.
At the same time, the technology becomes part of the student's approach to thinking and researching. A simple example is a spellchecker that removes the need to learn how to spell, or a calculator that removes the need to do arithmetic.
A more problematic example is relying upon Wikipedia for information. Of course, Wikipedia is a common laugh line in sitcoms, but the more basic issue is that there are many web sites where supposed "information" can be found.
Perhaps the basic issue in using technology is that it is out there and will become part of a student's coping mechanisms in learning and thinking, so it would be advisable to have students become savvy about the technology, and by no means ignore it during classes.
At the same time, the technology becomes part of the student's approach to thinking and researching. A simple example is a spellchecker that removes the need to learn how to spell, or a calculator that removes the need to do arithmetic.
A more problematic example is relying upon Wikipedia for information. Of course, Wikipedia is a common laugh line in sitcoms, but the more basic issue is that there are many web sites where supposed "information" can be found.
Perhaps the basic issue in using technology is that it is out there and will become part of a student's coping mechanisms in learning and thinking, so it would be advisable to have students become savvy about the technology, and by no means ignore it during classes.
5
Vocational education could be a key to ending much of the problems inherent in our income inequality and scrubbing the nation of the ability to elect a kakistocracy such as the Trump government.
Asserting new ways to educate can absolve us of old protocols protected by the unionization in our schools. Experimentation in methods can be enlightening. Change for change sake however, will create problems. There must be some checks and balances. Who establishes these controls?
Asserting new ways to educate can absolve us of old protocols protected by the unionization in our schools. Experimentation in methods can be enlightening. Change for change sake however, will create problems. There must be some checks and balances. Who establishes these controls?
1
Could the school districts that prohibit the teaching of critical thinking be induced to allow coding classes?
2
You would have to be incredibly naive to not see what is going on here: tech games and teacher-less classrooms for the masses while the plutocracy send their own kids to low-tech schools that still teach real subjects and critical thinking. If you're a member of the masses - you will be trained to be a thoughtless consumer of whatever the plutocracy pushes under your nose. It's an education system worth of Trump.
23
Get a clue about these people: their entire value system revolves around accumulation of money to exercise raw power over others.
17
I know many people who donate to schools and donate large amounts to schools that help poor kids. Many wealthy donors actually do really just want to help kids.
Some of the people in this news story seem to have a reasonable clue how to do education donations well - and in SF the Salesforce donations are producing very good results.
Others don't seem to have a clue. For example Zuckerberg and his support for a school with no walls makes no sense. As a teacher, I have many versions of this idea where the kids "work at their own pace." It has been tried and has failed - many ways and many times over he decades. For a tiny sliver of kids, this approach might work, but not for the bulk of kids, especially the ones donors are trying most to help.
The Summit school and Oakland school comments in the article make clear some of the shortcomings of this self-pacing approach.
In the article, it says clearly Oakland "Kids were self-pacing to failure".
Zuckerberg should instead look at what educational approaches good teachers support - not just fund things he imagines might work (and be fun for people like him).
Some of the people in this news story seem to have a reasonable clue how to do education donations well - and in SF the Salesforce donations are producing very good results.
Others don't seem to have a clue. For example Zuckerberg and his support for a school with no walls makes no sense. As a teacher, I have many versions of this idea where the kids "work at their own pace." It has been tried and has failed - many ways and many times over he decades. For a tiny sliver of kids, this approach might work, but not for the bulk of kids, especially the ones donors are trying most to help.
The Summit school and Oakland school comments in the article make clear some of the shortcomings of this self-pacing approach.
In the article, it says clearly Oakland "Kids were self-pacing to failure".
Zuckerberg should instead look at what educational approaches good teachers support - not just fund things he imagines might work (and be fun for people like him).
Before we rush to condemn, consider what has gone before.
Politics over educational excellence.
Political correctness over educational excellence.
Teacher unions ahead of students.
Incompetence among administrators and school boards.
Bogus statistics justifying bogus policies.
Con games from textbook publishers - some printed out blank sample books knowing school board members would never read them. Other publishers were incompetent, wrong on facts etc. Kickbacks were not unknown.
How could Silicon Valley do any worse?
Politics over educational excellence.
Political correctness over educational excellence.
Teacher unions ahead of students.
Incompetence among administrators and school boards.
Bogus statistics justifying bogus policies.
Con games from textbook publishers - some printed out blank sample books knowing school board members would never read them. Other publishers were incompetent, wrong on facts etc. Kickbacks were not unknown.
How could Silicon Valley do any worse?
3
Do worse? The arrogance and superficial problem-solving of much of 'Silicon Valley' and it's cocky disrupters promotes a shallow efficiency over deeper values and lifelong habits of mind and body. They overrate speed and slickness. Real learning is slow, spiral, full of self-questioning, and focused on our shortcomings and misunderstandings, not on tech triumphalism. Less screen time, more mind-hands-heart integration.
I am a former public school teacher and administrator, now retired, as always somewhat skeptical of private sector interventions in schools. However, reading the ideas of these CEO's is what charter schools were supposed to be about---experimentation with different curricular and instructional platforms. Most of the educators I have worked with are well-meaning and work hard everyday to engage the students in their classrooms. Unfortunately they are trapped in institutional structures more concerned with credentialing and control than achieving the educational goals written into their school mission statements. One caution for these CEO's, any form of technology is only a tool, that tool must be put into the hands of teachers and designed around organizational structures that break the iron grip of a pedagogical system designed not to educate. Specifically, we need to get rid of subjects, get rid of self-contained classrooms, get rid of credits and grades, get rid of textbooks and curriculum guides, and get rid of standardized testing. The goal, always, is to make our schools interesting not accountable. If I could make a suggestion---restructure schooling around one fundamental question: How do children learn? Taking a page from John Dewey, children like to make things, they like to talk with each other, they like novelty, they like solving real world problems ---design school structures and teacher credentialing around these likes--that would be true reform.
4
Want kids to learn? Make the center of education art, music, and tools. Progress in math, science, and literature radiates from these. How do we know this? These are what civilizations leave behin that's history.
Tech startup culture is ageist, frequently misogynist, chaotic, stressful and unstable. It's priorities are profit, mining data, and "fun" for twentysomethings. Why are we allowing (if not begging) it to take over where it doesn't belong?
24
Steve Jobs demonstrated how psychotic it is. He was a much smarter Donald Trump who kept everyone around him feeling insecure and off balance.
1
"Code.org ... has the stated goal of getting every public school in the United States to teach computer science." This is a great idea for Silicon Valley public schools or public schools in wealthy suburbs. (Although such schools probably already teach computer science.) But to apply this goal to public schools in rural Alaska or the Mississippi delta just makes these IT billionaires look clueless and arrogant.
1
It's not even a great idea in Silicon Valley.
2
I'm not sure why you feel this is a bad idea.
Someone in remote Alaska or rural Mississippi, who could learn to code and work from home, where there are zero high-paying job prospects nearby, sound like perfect candidates for a coding curriculum.
Not everyone who takes gym winds up an Olympic athlete, just as not every student who joins the school band winds up in the philharmonic. I didn't become a seamstress or a chef, but I value what I learned in sewing and cooking classes during middle school. In the tech-infused world that we live in, a greater understanding of what makes our technology tick wouldn't be a bad thing for most students.
Someone in remote Alaska or rural Mississippi, who could learn to code and work from home, where there are zero high-paying job prospects nearby, sound like perfect candidates for a coding curriculum.
Not everyone who takes gym winds up an Olympic athlete, just as not every student who joins the school band winds up in the philharmonic. I didn't become a seamstress or a chef, but I value what I learned in sewing and cooking classes during middle school. In the tech-infused world that we live in, a greater understanding of what makes our technology tick wouldn't be a bad thing for most students.
Writing a killer app, selling it for megabucks, and then dropping out, has already become the American Dream.
Computer tech? Programing code? More time in front of machines? This sounds like a nightmare future.
4
Today we read that a few billionaires are doing great things with the California education system by throwing money at it. Yesterday we were informed that 75% of black students in California can't read.
Something is very wrong.
Something is very wrong.
14
Actually something is going right in CA education.
As you say, "today" we find that money from these billionaires has started flowing (recently) to some CA schools. This has happened just in the last couple of years. Happily, CA test result have increased at every grade and for every ethnic group since these programs started.
Here is the data from the most recent test results:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr16/yr16rel57.asp
Still there is a a gap between ethnicities, but your informant with the 75% number is way off. The strongest black students in CA (56%) tested high enough to rate at either Exceeded, Met, or Almost met standards. The other black kids - less than half - certainly still can read but are struggling readers), they tested below standards. So those kids can't read well or at grade level. But they can read.
And they improved their average grade level pass rate at the same rate of increase as as the white kids. So there is still a gap, bt all groups are improving.
BTW the Bennioff money is SF has been very well focused and has helped foster the best ideas of the principals and the teachers at the schools that got the grants. I have visited some of these schools and the teachers I talk to are delighted with the difference it has made with their students.
As you say, "today" we find that money from these billionaires has started flowing (recently) to some CA schools. This has happened just in the last couple of years. Happily, CA test result have increased at every grade and for every ethnic group since these programs started.
Here is the data from the most recent test results:
http://www.cde.ca.gov/nr/ne/yr16/yr16rel57.asp
Still there is a a gap between ethnicities, but your informant with the 75% number is way off. The strongest black students in CA (56%) tested high enough to rate at either Exceeded, Met, or Almost met standards. The other black kids - less than half - certainly still can read but are struggling readers), they tested below standards. So those kids can't read well or at grade level. But they can read.
And they improved their average grade level pass rate at the same rate of increase as as the white kids. So there is still a gap, bt all groups are improving.
BTW the Bennioff money is SF has been very well focused and has helped foster the best ideas of the principals and the teachers at the schools that got the grants. I have visited some of these schools and the teachers I talk to are delighted with the difference it has made with their students.
And all the while, other people's children are being used as guinea pigs. Why don't they propose these at their children's schools?
14
Privileged children learn to value education before they even go to school.
Because they don't eat their own dog food.
The problem is the tax code. Billionaires should not exist.
9
The Republicans are are in complete denial of the eventual consequences of runaway wealth concentration: catastrophic chaotic collapse.
2
"They asked that their names be withheld, saying they feared repercussions for their careers."
This sentence struck me as significant. Are these hi-tech protocol promotions becoming cult-like?
Agree or be banished?
This sentence struck me as significant. Are these hi-tech protocol promotions becoming cult-like?
Agree or be banished?
9
Great, just what we need thousands of coders in the making. What happens to these students when the skills they are learning become obsolete.
7
Before that happens, the tech companies will train millions of minority and female students to do tasks now done by highly paid white young men. Then they will tweak the job descriptions so that they can pay these coders minimum wage (assuming we still even have a minimum wage by then). I have a minority child in public school, and I can see how the tech companies are dangling promises of highly paid jobs to lure these kids in. Supply and demand, Economics 101.
6
This is yet another reason not to teach coding to everyone. Teach the fundamental nature of computers and computing. You can even do that in art or English composition classes. Eventually, AI will do most of the coding, and software engineers will do the designing.
4
In this week's Time magazine, Bill Gates admits doesn't use any any type of electronic device for book reading, it's still the weighty paper of a hardcover book in his hands. Electronics has its place; we all use it every day. But as many have illuminated upon, it also has its drawbacks of instant gratification, low tolerance for waiting, and short attention span.
I have a suspicion that perhaps the most successful students in the long-term may be ones who transcend the immediacy of technology for the "weightiness" of traditional means of learning.
I have a suspicion that perhaps the most successful students in the long-term may be ones who transcend the immediacy of technology for the "weightiness" of traditional means of learning.
11
Efforts to reform education so far in the USA suffer from the same flaw: they are designed by businesspeople and/or politicians without much real input by educators.
There is this assumption that, since some teachers are not effective, then all teachers are ineffective. We are not using our best teachers as a resource to create the changes we really need.
Better tech is not the silver bullet.
There is this assumption that, since some teachers are not effective, then all teachers are ineffective. We are not using our best teachers as a resource to create the changes we really need.
Better tech is not the silver bullet.
15
Alot of doctors fail to cure cancer. Do we say the doctor is "ineffective"?
We hold teachers to impossible standards and give them no say-so over which kids they can teach; then we call them "ineffective." And guess where most of the "ineffective" teachers are clustered? In the schools with the most needy, poor children.
Guess where all of the "ineffective" doctors are clustered? In the places where pancreatic cancer is present.
We hold teachers to impossible standards and give them no say-so over which kids they can teach; then we call them "ineffective." And guess where most of the "ineffective" teachers are clustered? In the schools with the most needy, poor children.
Guess where all of the "ineffective" doctors are clustered? In the places where pancreatic cancer is present.
7
@Honeybee: that is NOT what I mean when I say "ineffective" (as in, union teachers who cannot be disciplined nor fired).
I mean...teachers who are openly abusive in language or physically to students and/or parents. I mean....teachers who sleep in class (seriously!). I mean....teachers who yak on their smartphones, while leaving kids with little or nothing to do. I mean....teachers who literally don't even try to teach anyone anything, but laze around and give "make work' assignments and give social promotions to every kid.
I've seen awful abuses by people who have no business in the classroom, but who are protected for 30 years by a all-powerful union -- then off to retirement as young as 48 and at 90% of full final salary plus luxe benefits the likes of which nobody else has.
I mean...teachers who are openly abusive in language or physically to students and/or parents. I mean....teachers who sleep in class (seriously!). I mean....teachers who yak on their smartphones, while leaving kids with little or nothing to do. I mean....teachers who literally don't even try to teach anyone anything, but laze around and give "make work' assignments and give social promotions to every kid.
I've seen awful abuses by people who have no business in the classroom, but who are protected for 30 years by a all-powerful union -- then off to retirement as young as 48 and at 90% of full final salary plus luxe benefits the likes of which nobody else has.
I have firsthand experience with working in a school system implementing a billionaire funded mathematics program.
I think the actual delivery method (computer) is less important than the other steps the billionaire is able to take that teachers are prevented from taking. For example, the rest of the school system sometimes runs completely out of paper, while these kids have all the resources they need.
The biggest thing this program has is the "learn at your own pace" idea, which to me actually allows teachers to effectively do something that the modern liberal school system prevents them from doing: repeat work on a topic that they haven't mastered.
In the classroom middle school teachers are effectively required to pass every student every year, and the students realize this so they don't try. Then they end up in high school algebra and they can't multiply. Algebra is hard enough already; if you don't have the basic concepts mastered it's basically impossible.
So yes, these programs can do better than traditional programs, but it's hard to distinguish how much of that is due to the software and how much of that is due to the billionaires having the prerogative and resources to do things teachers are prevented from doing.
I think the actual delivery method (computer) is less important than the other steps the billionaire is able to take that teachers are prevented from taking. For example, the rest of the school system sometimes runs completely out of paper, while these kids have all the resources they need.
The biggest thing this program has is the "learn at your own pace" idea, which to me actually allows teachers to effectively do something that the modern liberal school system prevents them from doing: repeat work on a topic that they haven't mastered.
In the classroom middle school teachers are effectively required to pass every student every year, and the students realize this so they don't try. Then they end up in high school algebra and they can't multiply. Algebra is hard enough already; if you don't have the basic concepts mastered it's basically impossible.
So yes, these programs can do better than traditional programs, but it's hard to distinguish how much of that is due to the software and how much of that is due to the billionaires having the prerogative and resources to do things teachers are prevented from doing.
5
Learning to mastery is an idea that should be implemented everywhere.
1
Note than NONE of the most competitive, elite private schools in our country will allow these educational shams into their midst.
Wealthy parents, who jump at any chance to provide their children with the best of everything, have no respect for the educational musings of people like Zuckerberg or Gates. They wouldn't trust Gates to medically treat their child and they sure don't trust him or his ilk to educate their child.
The handful of decision-makers in the public systems adopt this junk in exchange for either campaign donations or kickbacks.
Wealthy parents, who jump at any chance to provide their children with the best of everything, have no respect for the educational musings of people like Zuckerberg or Gates. They wouldn't trust Gates to medically treat their child and they sure don't trust him or his ilk to educate their child.
The handful of decision-makers in the public systems adopt this junk in exchange for either campaign donations or kickbacks.
20
Education is not an either/or proposition, but the sum total. Best teaching practices are critical but as the world evolves, education must also evolve and prepare students for the current and future world and not the world that was.
2
20 years in K-12 education and I've noticed one major trend: the latest, greatest ideas never have a chance to get off the ground because the next one comes along too fast. There are many tried and true teaching approaches out there and have been for decades. Nobody in the industry seems to have the attention span to carry them through. With Silicon Valley now deeply invested in reform, I can only assume this trend will accelerate.
9
Amen, and which coincides with the point I made in another post. When you are in an administrative or, especially, academic setting (never setting foot in an actual classroom, mind you) you need to come up with one idea after another to justify tenure or your existence. Failure? No biggie, just issue another paper and another idea. Meanwhile, it's the children who lose out (and the taxpayers and society who have to foot the bill for the failures)/
Certainly there is benefit to providing educators with funding to do what they want to do in their classrooms, with appropriate limitations. DonorsChoose.org is an example of that at work in the crowdfunding arena. And this hardly seems more dangerous than the infusion of money into public schools which came (comes?) from soft drink companies in exchange for placing their sugar-water vending machines within easy reach of the most vulnerable minds (young minds).
However, it is problematic that the solutions so often revolve around pushing children deeper into machines and further away from each other. The idea of a lounge for students to engage with each other sounds brilliant, but a lounge where you can sit on your laptop?
Civilization is built on relationships between individuals. It seems possible that in the future civilization could be built on the relationships between people and machines, but we do no know what damage could erupt. Facebook Live killings are a good example of what can happen we people feel drawn more toward their screen and their 'likes' than toward feeling empathy toward other people.
Humanity is by no means flawless, but our best selves arise from real human compassion, not from test-scores.
However, it is problematic that the solutions so often revolve around pushing children deeper into machines and further away from each other. The idea of a lounge for students to engage with each other sounds brilliant, but a lounge where you can sit on your laptop?
Civilization is built on relationships between individuals. It seems possible that in the future civilization could be built on the relationships between people and machines, but we do no know what damage could erupt. Facebook Live killings are a good example of what can happen we people feel drawn more toward their screen and their 'likes' than toward feeling empathy toward other people.
Humanity is by no means flawless, but our best selves arise from real human compassion, not from test-scores.
5
As if it weren't bad enough that we have an unqualified billionaire as Secretary of Education, we should now seek to turn over our entire education process to tech industry plutocrats?
Enough with this mentality. Enough with turning every aspect of our society over to the whims of the wealthy. Our government is not a business. Our educational system is not a "start up". If these self-styled tech gods want to tinker with a new app or tablet, fine. When it comes to the education of our children, they need to recognize the limits of their knowledge and experience. As Gertrude Stein once said to Picasso, "You are extraordinary within your limits, but your limits are extraordinarily there."
Enough with this mentality. Enough with turning every aspect of our society over to the whims of the wealthy. Our government is not a business. Our educational system is not a "start up". If these self-styled tech gods want to tinker with a new app or tablet, fine. When it comes to the education of our children, they need to recognize the limits of their knowledge and experience. As Gertrude Stein once said to Picasso, "You are extraordinary within your limits, but your limits are extraordinarily there."
22
It shocks me that education is only of the only industries where people with no experience as teachers or, indeed, any background in education at all feel entitled to "transform" the system. Surely giving money and assistance to public schools is laudable, but it's telling that some of the teachers in the article could not candidly and publicly share their personal opinion of the technology without jeopardizing their jobs.
I also detect some bias here - bright Silicon Valley billionaires might feel like entirely student-driven instruction and self-correction is the best way to teach children, but that belies their own experience as naturally high achieving learners. I find it a little disturbing that people with no experience at all in examining how diverse students learn are deigning a certain way of learning as best, and then heavily incentivizing it with money that underfunded schools are loathe to turn down.
It's wonderful that the tech world wants to improve public education, but it should be through working collaboratively with teachers and with real accountability, since it's unclear if these programs even work. We ask for accountability of teachers and students through high-stakes testing, and it's only fair that we ask the same of companies and individuals trying to augment our education system. Unlike startups, we can't afford to let our kids fail.
I also detect some bias here - bright Silicon Valley billionaires might feel like entirely student-driven instruction and self-correction is the best way to teach children, but that belies their own experience as naturally high achieving learners. I find it a little disturbing that people with no experience at all in examining how diverse students learn are deigning a certain way of learning as best, and then heavily incentivizing it with money that underfunded schools are loathe to turn down.
It's wonderful that the tech world wants to improve public education, but it should be through working collaboratively with teachers and with real accountability, since it's unclear if these programs even work. We ask for accountability of teachers and students through high-stakes testing, and it's only fair that we ask the same of companies and individuals trying to augment our education system. Unlike startups, we can't afford to let our kids fail.
19
To be fair, there are other areas so afflicted. Law enforcement, for one, where people who know little to nothing of civics, the law or the constitution, nor who have ever actually done the job, "know" with absolute certainty how the police should perform, enforce the law, handle any problem (often "they should do something" is as profound as that goes), etc.
I will say, however, one reason that some of this exists - and not to excuse some of the more ill-informed judgements we see and hear all the time - is that fields like education and law enforcement have such a direct impact on people's lives; thus they have far more skin in the game than caring to opine on how some other professions do their job.
I will say, however, one reason that some of this exists - and not to excuse some of the more ill-informed judgements we see and hear all the time - is that fields like education and law enforcement have such a direct impact on people's lives; thus they have far more skin in the game than caring to opine on how some other professions do their job.
4
You're absolutely right, it's a problem in some sectors such as law enforcement too. I might argue that it's particularly egregious in education now, given that we have a Secretary of Education filling the most senior position for that field in the land who has no professional experience in education at all.
Deprofessionalizing education in this way sends the message that teachers and teacher's opinions are secondary, paving the way for well-intentioned but perhaps deeply misguided billionaires and lawmakers to blindly search for the next "magic bullet" to fix a system that they have not worked within and do not truly understand.
Deprofessionalizing education in this way sends the message that teachers and teacher's opinions are secondary, paving the way for well-intentioned but perhaps deeply misguided billionaires and lawmakers to blindly search for the next "magic bullet" to fix a system that they have not worked within and do not truly understand.
4
A classroom with a trained adult and fellow students can be the first community children are introduced to outside of immediate family. It's where we learn to interact with others and develop the emotional intelligence that provides balance to intellect alone. A computer screen is not an equivalent experience, but it does have a place. Note the stereotype of a "computer nerd" is someone with this imbalance of intellect and emotional development. I hope that is not our goal....
8
Yes, we don't want to pay taxes, but let us tell you how to live, raise and teach you kids. We all know some much more then everyone else
Charter school do nothing but steal money from the public schools.
Charter school do nothing but steal money from the public schools.
18
Ridiculous. If charter schools are nothing but a parasite, why do they have many multiples of applicants per seat? Most other industries have benefitted from innovation, why not education and its "single payer" system which too often works more for the unions than for the students.
I've spent most of a long lifetime teaching kids to program computers, starting in the early days of the Logo programming language, the first one designed specifically for kids. (Today, the very popular Scratch language and online community are direct descendents of Logo.)
Learning to program is hugely empowering for a wide range of kids, not just the stereotypical nerds, but also kids interested in art or music or language whose technical skill at drawing or playing or writing hasn't caught up with their creativity.
This doesn't mean that every kid falls in love with programming, but many do, and what they learn is much more than the details of a programming language. They learn how to turn logical thinking into practical results.
This is the opposite of the kind of educational technology that keeps track of a kid's progress in some set of lessons and presents the next one in sequence. As Seymour Papert said, long ago, "The question is whether the kid should program the computer, or the computer should program the kid."
Using computers this way is based on a philosophy of kid-centered learning. It's not at all like the fear-driven idea that every kid has to learn to program because that'll be the only way to get a job in the future. And it's certainly not like the idea that computers are smarter than teachers.
Learning to program is hugely empowering for a wide range of kids, not just the stereotypical nerds, but also kids interested in art or music or language whose technical skill at drawing or playing or writing hasn't caught up with their creativity.
This doesn't mean that every kid falls in love with programming, but many do, and what they learn is much more than the details of a programming language. They learn how to turn logical thinking into practical results.
This is the opposite of the kind of educational technology that keeps track of a kid's progress in some set of lessons and presents the next one in sequence. As Seymour Papert said, long ago, "The question is whether the kid should program the computer, or the computer should program the kid."
Using computers this way is based on a philosophy of kid-centered learning. It's not at all like the fear-driven idea that every kid has to learn to program because that'll be the only way to get a job in the future. And it's certainly not like the idea that computers are smarter than teachers.
14
Conceptually clear and a real focus of the educational process.
2
No mention here of Tech's previous "successes" in the field of educational philanthropy. The 100 million dollars Mr. Zuckerberg promised to the Newark schools evaporated, and the 50 million dollars that the Gates Foundation gave to the NYC system almost 15 years ago to fund 50 "small schools" under the guidance of Joel Klein, met with equal success.
The problem here, the elephant in the room, is the fact that large, complex educational systems are not start-ups, nor are they businesses. And although innovation is always welcome, the job of educating young people is a hands-on, daily experience, where technology has proved to be only marginally successful.
If today's high schools were the result of the Carnegie Committee, some 120 years ago (with the stated need of producing workers well educated enough to join an assembly line), then the idea that the schools should be re-purposed to produce coders and programmers is equally repugnant.
Indeed, if the past is any guide to the future in the tech industry, these careers will probably be gone by the time today's elementary students join
the job market.
The problem here, the elephant in the room, is the fact that large, complex educational systems are not start-ups, nor are they businesses. And although innovation is always welcome, the job of educating young people is a hands-on, daily experience, where technology has proved to be only marginally successful.
If today's high schools were the result of the Carnegie Committee, some 120 years ago (with the stated need of producing workers well educated enough to join an assembly line), then the idea that the schools should be re-purposed to produce coders and programmers is equally repugnant.
Indeed, if the past is any guide to the future in the tech industry, these careers will probably be gone by the time today's elementary students join
the job market.
28
AWG makes great points. However, his remark that technology has proven to be only marginally successful ignores what's going on today in schools and in edtech startups. In the past, too many startups were ill-advised efforts by those who thought they "knew" what schools should have or by those who saw a road to quick profits. Many schools were burned by the bright, colorful lights of learning software.
Let those billionaires fund a testing program for learning software from startups to find out which really work and to deliver useful feedback to them on exactly how to fix, if fixable, their products. Publish all results.
Let those billionaires fund a testing program for learning software from startups to find out which really work and to deliver useful feedback to them on exactly how to fix, if fixable, their products. Publish all results.
2
Since computers are becoming ubiquitous in modern society, doing more to educate our young folks about them seems to be a good step forward. Along with the associated communication technologies (i.e. the internet).
While I applaud this move having more public awareness is a good thing and this article exemplifies that.
While I applaud this move having more public awareness is a good thing and this article exemplifies that.
1
...and when they get out of school, they know how to do ONE thing. This is why Americans don't know their own history, their civics, or have critical thinking skills to make a reasonable choice at the voting booth. Over the last 50 years, Americans have become less and less able to deal with all the facets of a productive, contented life. They don't read, they don't engage, they don't think. Glad I'm as old as I am. If we want to run an educational experiment, we should take our cues from successful western countries, not Silicon Valley.
77
Education involves much more than 10 multiple-choice questions hastily completed after each unit. Writing short answers and essays and doing projects are critical to synthesizing the information and expressing it as part of something bigger.
Also, MANY people do not learn by just reading. People need to use THE SENSES to best process information--speaking, touch, and even smell. The more ways the information is presented to the senses, the greater the chances that each student and groups of students will grasp it. Furthermore, many students learn experientially: They must DO to LEARN. Projects involving creating products and presenting to the group are critical acts that make the information sink in for experiential learners. These are also real job skills.
Finally, WORKING COLLABORATIVELY is an extremely effective learning technique and a critical job skill. Teaching students to work together on teams involves much more than teaching them to respond to prompts for rewards. The reward is the learning itself and the process of working together itself--INTRINSIC MOTIVATION. I have seen it change students--THEY GROW. Leaders emerge, hidden strengths come out, communication and relationship skills develop--so many benefits that cannot be derived from technology's extrinsic motivation systems. And, when students DO, they not only LEARN, they RETAIN the information and APPLY it to new information and experiences.
Technology can augment, not replace, HUMAN INSTRUCTION.
Also, MANY people do not learn by just reading. People need to use THE SENSES to best process information--speaking, touch, and even smell. The more ways the information is presented to the senses, the greater the chances that each student and groups of students will grasp it. Furthermore, many students learn experientially: They must DO to LEARN. Projects involving creating products and presenting to the group are critical acts that make the information sink in for experiential learners. These are also real job skills.
Finally, WORKING COLLABORATIVELY is an extremely effective learning technique and a critical job skill. Teaching students to work together on teams involves much more than teaching them to respond to prompts for rewards. The reward is the learning itself and the process of working together itself--INTRINSIC MOTIVATION. I have seen it change students--THEY GROW. Leaders emerge, hidden strengths come out, communication and relationship skills develop--so many benefits that cannot be derived from technology's extrinsic motivation systems. And, when students DO, they not only LEARN, they RETAIN the information and APPLY it to new information and experiences.
Technology can augment, not replace, HUMAN INSTRUCTION.
18
To continue from this well written article, and for the sake of fairness can we decide that "philanthropy" does not include the attempt to influence school board elections, or the "end to end influence" political approach to education reform?
Philanthropy is grants, building, funds, scholarships. There are many people and organizations who do this without the overtly political function of overthrowing public school board members (as Reed Hastings just did in Los Angeles) or without the express intent to sell computers and digital services to schools.
If we can decide that Philanthropy is aimed at helping all students, we can then make better decisions on those activities that cross the line and end up hurting what is badly needed democratic institution: schools.
Philanthropy is grants, building, funds, scholarships. There are many people and organizations who do this without the overtly political function of overthrowing public school board members (as Reed Hastings just did in Los Angeles) or without the express intent to sell computers and digital services to schools.
If we can decide that Philanthropy is aimed at helping all students, we can then make better decisions on those activities that cross the line and end up hurting what is badly needed democratic institution: schools.
9
Hard to think critically on this issue when we spend so little on children during the critical years. In Italy, public education begins at 3. People of means have known for many years that quality pre-school education makes a large difference in the eventual take from education by students. Better teaching tools are great, but teaching children how to learn needs to begin before he age of 4 when many personality traits are set...
3
As long as these efforts go to PUBLIC schools and not to for-profit charter schools (schools that can exclude pupils) then this is a good idea. Great. If it is only in place for charter schools it is unfair to public school students.
6
After I reading this, I can only include that these guys either don't remember middle school or were atypical learners. Once again, out of Silicon Valley - the solution seems to be to take people out of the equation -in this case -teachers. At Vanderbilt's Peabody College of Education, continued research focuses on things like mindfulness, motivating students, and the benefits of teacher autonomy in directing and re-directing the course of learning. Things, a computer program can't do. Additionally, years of research looking at the developmental brains of middle schoolers tells us that it is one of the most active periods of growth - with the kids often acting in unpredictable ways. (see Brain Development in Young Adolescents at NEA.org). There is not an algorithm for that.
10
This all fits in with our love of experts in this country. Some time ago teachers, at certainly at the elementary level and generally at high school as well, were able to instruct quite well with a Bachelor's Degree. Today people seem to believe that without a Masters or PHD these teachers are now "unqualified", a myth perpetuated across numerous fields of employment.
Of course the drive to get Masters degrees arose, in part, from a means of the unions to get more money for salaries (higher degree, higher pay, higher pension). Academia started churning out ever more PHDs in education and those people needed to theorize and experiment and write papers and all the rest, so schools became constant testing labs for one new "solution" to educational ills after another. And look at the mess we have today.
Some of these tech innovations may well have some kids in some cases, but as with so many other areas in modern life, technology in and of itself is often not the real world answer its sold as. We need good teachers (public or private), paid well enough (a level one may argue over), dedicated, caring, etc., as well as outside involvement from parents and communities. We don't need investors using classrooms as beta labs nor do we need the "educational industrial complex" needlessly churning out advanced degrees that mean little in the actual classroom.
Of course the drive to get Masters degrees arose, in part, from a means of the unions to get more money for salaries (higher degree, higher pay, higher pension). Academia started churning out ever more PHDs in education and those people needed to theorize and experiment and write papers and all the rest, so schools became constant testing labs for one new "solution" to educational ills after another. And look at the mess we have today.
Some of these tech innovations may well have some kids in some cases, but as with so many other areas in modern life, technology in and of itself is often not the real world answer its sold as. We need good teachers (public or private), paid well enough (a level one may argue over), dedicated, caring, etc., as well as outside involvement from parents and communities. We don't need investors using classrooms as beta labs nor do we need the "educational industrial complex" needlessly churning out advanced degrees that mean little in the actual classroom.
7
I'm a retired science teacher. Student led learning with teachers as mentors is an intriguing model, and while earning about big ideas in science like how diverse plants and animals coexist from a software program makes me wonder where experimentation fit in? As a 6th grade teacher in a Title I middle school, I engaged my students in the process of science so that they gained skills in asking questions and designing and carrying out experiments, and figuring out what their data meant. We did this in the classroom ( flying rubber band airplanes , miniature catapults, and making a rainbow layers of salt solutions to understand density concepts) , and in field studies- collecting weird aquatic insect larvae from a pond to learn about water quality, and testing ozone in Houston's industrial air. One day as we walked back to school, wet and muddy, carrying nets, water testing kits, and buckets of "critters" to look at under microscopes, Miguel exclaimed "I didn't know THIS is what scientists do!" How do you get this excitement about science that comes from discovering amazing things in the real world from a computer? And how do you test it with a 10 question multiple choice test?
35
What is the real objectives here? Training children to perform jobs that they only hire hb1 visa for now? Who seriously thinks they suddenly will hire american....
12
One of the things that Zuckerberg, Hastings, et al have in common is that they likely attended great elementary and secondary schools with teachers who were trained to teach them critical thinking, math, science and language arts -- the fundamentals.
12
If these successful entrepreneurs want to make a real contribution to secondary education in the USA, they may consider of having an ongoing discussion with educational innovators.
As a sustainability sociologist who has taught some seventeen years in the NY city middle school system in its science department I developed a student-centered Earth and Peace Literacy (EPL) perspective that preceded the major Regent Earth Science sections. Much of the EPL perspective also informs that educational work of Earth and Peace Education International. www.globalepe.org.
It is also this perspective that inspired the Climate and Energy Discovery Center in Central North Carolina where I moved after my 43 years in New York City. The Center is considered to be a laboratory that will influence the state educational establishment in the direction of having student attitudes consider the looming climate catastrophe a real challenge in their lives and act accordingly in choosing the direction of their lives.
If one of the mentioned entrepreneurs want to consider investing $5 million for the first five years of operation, he would be most welcome!
As a sustainability sociologist who has taught some seventeen years in the NY city middle school system in its science department I developed a student-centered Earth and Peace Literacy (EPL) perspective that preceded the major Regent Earth Science sections. Much of the EPL perspective also informs that educational work of Earth and Peace Education International. www.globalepe.org.
It is also this perspective that inspired the Climate and Energy Discovery Center in Central North Carolina where I moved after my 43 years in New York City. The Center is considered to be a laboratory that will influence the state educational establishment in the direction of having student attitudes consider the looming climate catastrophe a real challenge in their lives and act accordingly in choosing the direction of their lives.
If one of the mentioned entrepreneurs want to consider investing $5 million for the first five years of operation, he would be most welcome!
1
Stop complaining, everyone! These tech companies are only trying to help the way they know how. We teachers are not fools, we can be trusted to use technology to help students learn without sacrificing the classroom dynamic. Teachers need and appreciate all the help they can get.
4
What about thousands of Americans who have no Internet access? Wouldn't it be better to get us ALL connected first?
2
At a reasonable cost.
I think it's great that these tech titans are trying to improve the educations process, but it's a double edged sword. These individuals have an agenda which will be reflected in the learning material made available to the students. Not sure how to address this issue, but it's worthy of reflection. Technology is great, but so is critical thinking.
5
Exactly...
Children need adults interaction and supervision. This is barely touched upon in this article. There is no substitute for a good teacher, but those are so hard to define, much less find.
5
good parents matter more than good teachers. any teacher will tell you that.
3
And good parents may be harder to find than good teachers. At least teachers have to undergo training and pass qualifying tests.
3
I have a PhD in English. I have almost no respect for people who pass through Education programs. The GRE required to get into an Education doctoral program is 150-200 pts lower than the GRE score need to get into a regular PhD program.
If I had my way, only people who've earned a master's degree or higher would be allowed to have kids.
If I had my way, only people who've earned a master's degree or higher would be allowed to have kids.
Do any of them have a Masters or PhD in Education? A teaching certificate?
I thought not.
I thought not.
14
Well, considering how poorly many educational "experts" do these days and the mess their constant changes have made, perhaps that's not much of a criteria.
7
That's exactly the perspective keeping us in the past.
1
Assuming, Buck, you are directing your comment to your post, I have seen little evidence that the increase in degrees beyond the BA level has made any measurable improvement in student performance, learning, retention, etc.
2
This is why my wife and I may both try to be working full-time once we have school-age kids. So we can afford to send them to a private school which doesn't want to see kids tied to computers all day. Technology is great but kids have little ability to discern how it is forming them (heck, adults don't have that much more) and I would rather my kids spend time with their classmates rather than screens and caring adults rather than algorithms.
30
Send them to any typical urban public school--where money is lacking, so is technology, and you will find your children will get a good education in a diverse--real--setting. Also, make sure phones are banned or that students have to check theirs in lockers. Then your kiddos will really learn. And look closely at reading lists--a diverse selection of truly meaty texts will tell you a lot.
1
I love that these tech entrepreneurs are challenging the status quo and trying to improve public education. However, I just hope that they work closely with education experts like those trained formally in curriculum theory/development. I like Mark Zuckerberg, but just because he is a billionaire who had the right idea at the right time, doesn't mean he knows how to run a classroom or a school. The same is true for the others.
14
The down side is that these programs are very likely storing data on each student. This could come back to haunt students later in life. It is another step closer to a Big Brother scenario where every bit of a person's life is observed by authorities. If we do not control our own story through adaptation and self-direction we cede our future to mindless, soulless algorithms.
19
Why don't we make the same investment in quality teacher-training programs as Finland does (which by the way, uses hands-on, experiential and play as problem solving pathways and the development of thinking skills), valuing the teacher-child relationship and social classroom interaction? Point and click. Do you remember when play was considered an essential part of a child's development -- role-playing, negotiating, learning to resolve problems and disputes with appropriate guidance in the backyard or on the playground? These are not perfect solutions, but to marginalize teachers, to think we are 'equalizing' the playing field to create more computer programmers, is hardly a rounded education. What about disadvantaged children who have a hard time just getting to school? Where does art, empathy, creative thinking and beautiful language come into play here? Computer skills are essential for all students in all schools. But, we need to respect the role of motor skills (think handwriting and dexterity) as part of the learning/thinking process. This is reminiscent of other educational programs that have left many holes in people's skills and thinking. Whole language comes to mind. We were so concerned about creativity that we failed to remember that basic skills -- phonics and grammar were a part of learning how to re-present our thinking by developing automaticity as part of the process.
http://hechingerreport.org/how-finland-broke-every-rule-and-created-a-to...
http://hechingerreport.org/how-finland-broke-every-rule-and-created-a-to...
80
Pre college teaching, I find, is best with only the students and the teacher in the room. Desks and chairs, paper and pencils, are the only technology needed for actual learning to take place. All else is in the way. While this may vary according to subject (I teach English), probably not as much as most people would think, certainly the executives profiled in this article.
9
I think this is overstated. Have you been teaching long enough to remember the days when asking a student to edit or revise a paper was experienced as torturing the kid because of the pain of the mechanics of typing, then retyping after finding typos in the revised version? When I was a kid, being asked to revise a paper was pretty rare for that reason. Instead the teacher just put a grade on top of the paper and that was that. Word processing has changed the writing process in schools, entirely for the better.
That's not to say that teachers should abdicate their role to the computer! But neither should they reflexively ban computers from the room.
That's not to say that teachers should abdicate their role to the computer! But neither should they reflexively ban computers from the room.
4
The US education system could benefit from an education reform. However, what these tech programs (and our current national program) fail to address is that students learn differently. This is something that we all know. Not everyone is a Mark Zuckerberg or a Reed Hastings or a Steve Jobs. They are exceptional people and that is why they are where they are. Teaching all kids the same way or using the same methods will not result in all kids becoming brilliant individuals when they grow up. Some people will do well no matter what kind of hardships are thrown at them but most people will not. Similarly, some students will excel despite their educational environment--we cannot attribute their success to these particular programs, it might just be they are an exceptional person.
When I read education-related articles such as this, one of the biggest topics that is often glossed over or is completely unaddressed is the home life of these kids. No matter how much support we try to provide kids at school, they spend the majority of their time at home, in an environment that we cannot control. If kids are constantly worrying about their safety, or about their parents' safety, or about being hungry or clean, etc. no matter how shiny and new the laptops they play with at school are, they are likely going to lag behind. If they live in a surrounding where they parents don't value education, they're not likely to succeed regardless of what is available for them at school.
When I read education-related articles such as this, one of the biggest topics that is often glossed over or is completely unaddressed is the home life of these kids. No matter how much support we try to provide kids at school, they spend the majority of their time at home, in an environment that we cannot control. If kids are constantly worrying about their safety, or about their parents' safety, or about being hungry or clean, etc. no matter how shiny and new the laptops they play with at school are, they are likely going to lag behind. If they live in a surrounding where they parents don't value education, they're not likely to succeed regardless of what is available for them at school.
14
You know, despite teaching computer science, I'm no fan of Zuckerberg and unenthusiastic about code.org. But your criticism seems unfair to me.
Yes, absolutely, kids' home lives matter enormously! Economic inequality is at the root of every social problem, including the ones in education. So, should we just give up on teaching? The best teaching, with or without technology, isn't going to solve every problem. But that doesn't make what we do in schools irrelevant.
Yes, absolutely, kids' home lives matter enormously! Economic inequality is at the root of every social problem, including the ones in education. So, should we just give up on teaching? The best teaching, with or without technology, isn't going to solve every problem. But that doesn't make what we do in schools irrelevant.
2
The concept of individual student led learning is not new. It's been around a long time in the Montessori method. Each child learns at their own pace and teachers facilitate. When done well this is a fantastic learning process. Using technology to make this technique available to more children is fine in my eyes.
I also think it's worth paying attention to new ideas from these intellectually successful people. Many probably succeeded not because of their schooling but in spite of it. (As I have seen in many other cases.) They likely have some good insight into fixing what's broken. Furthermore they are not encumbered by political ideology. And you do realize that all the political education plans like "no child left behind," "common core," and standardized testing are also unsubstantiated "experiments on millions of children." Many of the good changes we could make that are data driven never make it thru the politics. And teachers who would like to implement those "data driven improvements" often have their hands tied by all those politically driven programs.
I'm all for silicon valley getting involved.
I also think it's worth paying attention to new ideas from these intellectually successful people. Many probably succeeded not because of their schooling but in spite of it. (As I have seen in many other cases.) They likely have some good insight into fixing what's broken. Furthermore they are not encumbered by political ideology. And you do realize that all the political education plans like "no child left behind," "common core," and standardized testing are also unsubstantiated "experiments on millions of children." Many of the good changes we could make that are data driven never make it thru the politics. And teachers who would like to implement those "data driven improvements" often have their hands tied by all those politically driven programs.
I'm all for silicon valley getting involved.
6
Why does the New York Times leave out the role of the US Department of Education and the federal reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act in these experiments on our kids? Or the leadership of the national
teachers unions? Our political leaders, across the spectrum, have been working overtime to advance the tech-driven "personalized learning" agenda, and so far seem to have gotten a free pass from the media. Closer attention to these growing public-private partnerships may help with the issue of insufficient oversight.
teachers unions? Our political leaders, across the spectrum, have been working overtime to advance the tech-driven "personalized learning" agenda, and so far seem to have gotten a free pass from the media. Closer attention to these growing public-private partnerships may help with the issue of insufficient oversight.
9
Zuckerberg does not understand education. The foundation of learning is the love that exists between a student and his/her teacher. Kids can not learn in a vacuum.
24
I clicked "recommend" on this one, because I strongly agree that the teacher/student relationship is at the core of teaching and learning. This is what education learned from Buber. But it's only fair to point out that No Child Left Standing has been much more of an obstacle to a loving relationship in the classroom than technology has been.
1
As a science teacher, I love technology and games certainly get kids interested. However, after a short period of time, I notice that the kids are too focused on winning and not on learning. For example, I use a review game that forces them to work in teams to answer questions. Each team member has some of the answers which forces them to talk to each other, aiding in group learning. The problem arises after 3 or 4 rounds. Instead of reinforcing the lessons they have learned, the "smart" kids figure out work arounds that allow them to answer very quickly so that other, slower kids, can't keep up. Hence, it becomes a game of finding the button fast, instead of actually learning the answers. Technology has a definite role in the classroom, but teachers are still necessary, at least for now.
14
If we should have learned only one thing in the ascension of Trump to the office of President, it is that successful business leaders may be good at making money but are not qualified in politics, law, medicine, education, and democracy by dint of their business credentials.
80
I think there is a distinction that needs to be made: there are those in positions of wealth and power who have discovered ways to game the system, who find a glitch they monopolize to their benefit. Then there are those who actually make something, invent something, build something new that changes the system, opening it up, expanding opportunity and affording progress. I don't hold their success against them, and welcome their efforts in the experiment that is education.
2
How neoliberalism works:
Step 1) Billionaires and millionaires fund political campaigns to reduce taxes on the wealthy and corporations.
Step 2) The lower taxes result in insufficient funding for public education and other public services. (Many states are spending less on public education now than they did before the 2008 recession, even as the need for funding and the percentage of children in poverty in our public schools is growing.)
Step 3) Public schools are forced to ask billionaires, millionaires and corporations for "donations" to run the schools because there is insufficient public funding
Step 3) The billionaires, millionaires and corporations get to control how their "donations" are used and to experiment on our children with unproven ideas that reflect their ideology and often help their business interests
Imagine if we required billionaires, millionaires and corporations to pay their fair share of taxes and used proven education techniques and a democratic decision-making process to run those schools instead of turning our children and our public schools into experiments for the super wealthy.
Step 1) Billionaires and millionaires fund political campaigns to reduce taxes on the wealthy and corporations.
Step 2) The lower taxes result in insufficient funding for public education and other public services. (Many states are spending less on public education now than they did before the 2008 recession, even as the need for funding and the percentage of children in poverty in our public schools is growing.)
Step 3) Public schools are forced to ask billionaires, millionaires and corporations for "donations" to run the schools because there is insufficient public funding
Step 3) The billionaires, millionaires and corporations get to control how their "donations" are used and to experiment on our children with unproven ideas that reflect their ideology and often help their business interests
Imagine if we required billionaires, millionaires and corporations to pay their fair share of taxes and used proven education techniques and a democratic decision-making process to run those schools instead of turning our children and our public schools into experiments for the super wealthy.
384
Also, billionaires are able to take advantage of tax laws, providing them with tremendous tax breaks for their investments in education ventures and charter schools. Their involvement in education reform is not benevolent.
63
This is so true it makes my head hurt.
But wait, since are Silicon Valley billionaires, aren't they progressives, Hillary supporters and all that, thus tuned in and correct thinking, not vile "old white men" that dreaded scourge of, well, everything under Creation (unless your name is Soros, or Bezos, or, well, no matter)? How can they be greedy and self-serving?
1
What I'd like to see is strengthening of the public school system. We've invested tremendous amounts of money in our schools (K-12, Community Colleges, Universities) and in my mind they are under utilized because they are underfunded (or if you want, they are run for the benefit of the administrators and teachers).
In K-12 the schools should be fixed, no broken bathrooms or leaky roofs. The schools should be open with before school programs and they should be open with after school programs in whatever the students want, art, music, math, basketball, whatever. There should be tutors available for all those topics, along with appropriate security.
In the higher education realm the universities should be positioned to help adults get higher education degrees.
In K-12 the schools should be fixed, no broken bathrooms or leaky roofs. The schools should be open with before school programs and they should be open with after school programs in whatever the students want, art, music, math, basketball, whatever. There should be tutors available for all those topics, along with appropriate security.
In the higher education realm the universities should be positioned to help adults get higher education degrees.
10
"They are run for the benefit of the administrators and teachers".
Amen, sir. You get it.
Also for the benefit of the vastly wealthy and powerful PUBLIC TEACHER UNIONS, which utterly control and dominate public education -- and who are steadfastly against ANY reforms or changes.
Why can't we start by asking the most basic questions?
1. why does the school YEAR follow a calendar based on FARMING in the 19th century -- when almost no students anymore live on farms?
2. why do they take all summer off (paid vacation to lazy public employees), when children desperately are failing and need to keep on learning?
3. why is the school day 6 hours (OR LESS) when children desperately need to be kept busy and learning while their parents are away at jobs, meaning at least 8AM to 5PM?
4. why do we permit children to DROP OUT of school, or fail to show up....until at least age 18 or graduation? why are there no truant officers???
5. why do we permit disruptive, violent students to destroy education for others -- instead of putting them into reform school?
Until we can answer THOSE questions and change the paradigm, nothing will ever get better.
Amen, sir. You get it.
Also for the benefit of the vastly wealthy and powerful PUBLIC TEACHER UNIONS, which utterly control and dominate public education -- and who are steadfastly against ANY reforms or changes.
Why can't we start by asking the most basic questions?
1. why does the school YEAR follow a calendar based on FARMING in the 19th century -- when almost no students anymore live on farms?
2. why do they take all summer off (paid vacation to lazy public employees), when children desperately are failing and need to keep on learning?
3. why is the school day 6 hours (OR LESS) when children desperately need to be kept busy and learning while their parents are away at jobs, meaning at least 8AM to 5PM?
4. why do we permit children to DROP OUT of school, or fail to show up....until at least age 18 or graduation? why are there no truant officers???
5. why do we permit disruptive, violent students to destroy education for others -- instead of putting them into reform school?
Until we can answer THOSE questions and change the paradigm, nothing will ever get better.
1
The software term "GIGO" would apply to most of the programs developed for learning - (garbage in, garbage out). Math skills and computer science (with the kids writing real programs, not choosing the correct bits) might work - but the rest of the subjects being taught really rely upon cooperative learning with other humans, along with integration of other subjects at the same grade level. Students need to interact with other kids and be guided by a teacher, not only for learning the subjects that they like, but to be exposed to subjects that don't interest them (yet) - the "eat your peas and broccoli" means the students need to leave their comfort zone and try subjects they aren't familiar with - self-directed learning doesn't force the students to try different approaches and subjects. How do you know what your passion is, unless you're exposed to lots of different ideas?
12
I thought the Netflix algorithm was widely considered to be a flop. In our household, it's a distraction at best.
Beyond that, I worry that subjects I consider important--serious history, serious literature, philosophy (political and otherwise), serious art and music instruction--cannot work on this point-and-click model of education and will therefore be deemphasized.
Behind it all is the question of what the purpose of education is. The answer the Silicon Valley types seem to be giving is "job training." And for what kind of jobs? The ones you commute to on 280 or 101 on the SF Bay peninsula.
Fine. But another answer is developing human beings, citizens, and creative thinkers. Ones who are not ignorant of the most distinguished achievements in the history of their own language. Who know the histories of conflict, successes, and failures of people distant from them in space and time. Who grasp the origins of and principal arguments for competing political ideologies.
This is not job training. But it does give students the intellectual resources needed to confront each new wave of salesmen/benefactors trying to convince them that their wares are unprecedented and their motives are disinterested.
Beyond that, I worry that subjects I consider important--serious history, serious literature, philosophy (political and otherwise), serious art and music instruction--cannot work on this point-and-click model of education and will therefore be deemphasized.
Behind it all is the question of what the purpose of education is. The answer the Silicon Valley types seem to be giving is "job training." And for what kind of jobs? The ones you commute to on 280 or 101 on the SF Bay peninsula.
Fine. But another answer is developing human beings, citizens, and creative thinkers. Ones who are not ignorant of the most distinguished achievements in the history of their own language. Who know the histories of conflict, successes, and failures of people distant from them in space and time. Who grasp the origins of and principal arguments for competing political ideologies.
This is not job training. But it does give students the intellectual resources needed to confront each new wave of salesmen/benefactors trying to convince them that their wares are unprecedented and their motives are disinterested.
55
"Beta Testing" Please...this byline and story would be about "Guinea Pigs" if the investment, ideas and work was offered up by anyone other than our liberal friends in Silicon Valley.
21
What an utter con-job the Silicon Valley Billionaires are putting over on our schools. We don't do the simple things that are already known to work, such as removing bad teachers and promoting good ones with merit pay, splitting students into roughly equivalent ability groups with mobility between groups, and really challenging students with rigorous work in reading, math and science. Instead, we get a new experiment each year with a new theory from the disastrous Education Schools at our universities. Now we have to put up with Silicon Valley trying to selling their software in the guise of improving education. Stop this nonsense. They are just tapping a new market.
51
Part of the problem with the comments is that it seems to be colored by the way Natasha Singer presented the article with her own bias coming through. No one is forcing the school districts mentioned into these programs.. The ones who seem to be worried are the bureaucrats and members of the Teachers Union whose omnipotence may be called into question. Just assume that a teacher in Boston is found to be an extremely interesting history teacher and suppose that by broadcasting over the internet he is able to teach thousands of students nation or worldwide. Where is the harm. Suppose interesting literature is suggested and a ten question assessment is given which leads to individual assessment at the conclusion. What's the harm. Every student in this era needs to have computer skills.
The one things the billionaires COULD do with their vast wealth -- that would genuinely help -- is counter the immense power of wealthy teacher unions -- who influence politics! with the forced dues of members! -- and who utterly control public education in this country.
Note that no tech billionaire sends THEIR OWN CHILDREN to our lousy, failing public schools run by rich, greedy public unions.
We had good schools 50 years ago -- BEFORE THE UNIONS TOOK OVER.
Note that no tech billionaire sends THEIR OWN CHILDREN to our lousy, failing public schools run by rich, greedy public unions.
We had good schools 50 years ago -- BEFORE THE UNIONS TOOK OVER.
1
Teaching is collaborative, not competitive. Teachers need to be able to share what works in the classroom without fear that making a colleague a better teacher will cost them dearly. Besides, merit pay has not been proven to increase learning.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-merit-pay-for...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/post/why-merit-pay-for...
These guys are billionaires. The merely donation of a few bucks is a drop in the bucket for them. Besides they can write it off as a charitable donation on their tax returns. How about donating several million to these schools. This would show that they are serious. Sounds more like a public relations stunt
10
These efforts have the potential for being double edged swords. The use of technology by ideologically driven billionaires to mold the minds of small children could be something out of science fiction. And, quite honestly, we have seem what wealthy people on both sides of the political spectrum will do. Any means seems to justify their desired ends. The same people who are concerned about national ID cards and the control of personal data by governments should be terrified about the potential use of technology under the guise of education to indoctrinate or create the capability of indoctrinating our children. If this was being done by a bunch of people from Wall Street, there would be an uproar.
Just thought I'd throw this out there as a potential outlier perspective. I'm not predicting it.
Just thought I'd throw this out there as a potential outlier perspective. I'm not predicting it.
160
what is is about a national ID that scares the average American? The other 95% of them while we fool around with 50 different state driver's lic?
"Administrators in some districts said that students so enjoyed the math program that some had begged their parents to let them play DreamBox even during trips to the supermarket" . You'd be foolish not to see such apps are the future of education and they will in fact accelerate the pace of learning.
Judge, most Americans today are so addicted to their iPhones, iPads, Facebook, etc. that they cannot see how truly EVIL companies like Apple, Google and Facebook have become.
1
I believe this is what is known as Social Engineering.
Robert Moses tried this and we all know how that worked out.
Food for thought.
Robert Moses tried this and we all know how that worked out.
Food for thought.
8
Teaching is an art, not a science. Great teachers already know how to engage students and create learning environments that work.
Billionaires have wrecked our political system, our sense of community and they are trying to wreck education - so they can collect more of our money.
Billionaires have wrecked our political system, our sense of community and they are trying to wreck education - so they can collect more of our money.
16
Bill Gates with several other billionaires in Washington State tried to pass a law allowing charter schools in 1995, 1997, 1998, and 1999. They put it on the ballot with an initiative in 1996, and again in 2000 and the voters firmly rejected charter schools both times. Finally in 2004, with bus loads of signature-gatherers brought in from around the country and millions of dollars spent, the iniative on charter schools passed. When interviewed in 2015, Gates spoke again about the nuisance of democracy. He has lamented many times that it would be much easier to get things done politically without the hassle of voters, school boards, and teachers. It is amazing that someone who believes democracy is a nuisance wishes to be in charge of our students, the citizens and future voters of this country.
91
My thoughts exactly. After they finish "disrupting" our "backward and inefficient" educational system, these techno-billionaires will set about "disrupting" our "backward and inefficient" democracy. With only the best intentions, of course! And with only the most disastrous results.
7
But it was OK when Jeff Bezos and Michael Bloomberg -- both billionaires plus ultra -- spent tens of millions of their own money -- brought in their own paid campaign workers and signature gatherers and phone huckstesr -- to force gay marriage votes in Maine and Minnesota.
1
Reed Hastings is another billionaire who finds democracy annoying. He has proposed eliminating all elected school boards in the country because they stand in the way of the implementation of his algorithms.
1
"These efforts coincide with a larger Silicon Valley push to sell computers and software to American schools, a lucrative market projected to reach $21 billion by 2020." There's my problem with tech gurus taking over education. It's about selling a product and making a profit, not about teaching our children to be intelligent, critical thinkers. I'm reminded of a line from an old episode of "Star Trek." Mr. Spock says, "Computers make excellent and efficient servants, but I have no wish to serve UNDER them." And I don't wish to teach under them, nor have my students learn solely from them. High tech has a downside, although Silicon Valley will never admit it. With laptops, iPads, cell-phones and other technology, we have become more electronically connected than ever before. We have also become more physically and emotionally dis-connected than ever before. True learning comes from real-life, non-digital, person-to-person, teacher-student interaction. I love my laptop as much as the next guy (thank God for Moodle and Edmodo!), but I know when to shut it off and talk with my students. Technology has a weird habit of veering off in unexpected directions, and we need to be more aware of this. "When all you have is a hammer, everything starts looking like a nail." We need to look beyond the bells-and-whistles of laptops and ask, "Is all this tech helping me to TEACH my students...or is it just distracting them?"
109
Love the Mr. Spock allusion! Perfect!
1
Any approach to change a system is welcome but we need to be careful. The change should be organic and backed by solid research. I am skeptical of these tycoons pushing their ideas of changing a system through which they themselves had gone through and achieved tremendous success. These founders didn't learn coding at elementary school. For that matters, is the coding only skills imparted at the schools? What about art, music, sports, culture? Are these again a effort by rich people to influence integral part of our society so that our kids becomes coders who can work in there companies? In the end I am not even sure if coding would be so sought after ten years from now. Salaries are already coming down in IT sectors. Let the educators do their job. If you have money give to school, asked them to put in good use but don't assume that since you built a successful company the same approach would work in school system.
37
Not only can coding be done easily by low paid workers in India, Pakistan, China, etc. but in the FUTURE....coding will be about as useful as shoeing horses. Most computer systems will have sophisticated AI which will essentially "code itself".
Coding is something mechanical that can and will be done by machines. The things that are uniquely human -- art, music, science, poetry, books -- can never be done by machines.
We are raising a nation of illiterates.
Coding is something mechanical that can and will be done by machines. The things that are uniquely human -- art, music, science, poetry, books -- can never be done by machines.
We are raising a nation of illiterates.
4
Why not keep it simple. Look at Singapore, Finland and a few countries where children are educated well for a reasonable cost? The Ego of these leaders who will declare victory when their projects fail and simply move on to the next fashion label trend.
27
Finland is a superb example. They are a very small nation, but have the world's best schools. Why?
1. they start school at age 7 and second grade -- no kindergarten or pre school or even first grade. At 7, children are READY TO LEARN.
2. they pay their teachers modestly, despite requiring a master's degree. And bad teachers can be FIRED. Finnish teachers earn 35% LESS (yes, less!) than US public schoolteachers.
3. because of that, Finnish teachers are not living in a Social Worker's Paradise, while the parents of their students must suffer in a dog-eat-dog laissez faire capitalist system, at a much lower standard of living. That promotes EQUALITY and RESPECT between teacher, student and parent.
4. the Finnish school day and year are much longer than in the US. Despite a harsh climate, they have no "snow days", so that lazy union employees can get a free day off with pay.
5. students and teachers EAT TOGETHER for lunch, the same good quality (but plain & simple) homecooked meals. Teachers do not run away to their own "lounge" to hide from students whom they hold in contempt.
Those are just a few of the reasons their schools THRIVE and our FAIL.
1. they start school at age 7 and second grade -- no kindergarten or pre school or even first grade. At 7, children are READY TO LEARN.
2. they pay their teachers modestly, despite requiring a master's degree. And bad teachers can be FIRED. Finnish teachers earn 35% LESS (yes, less!) than US public schoolteachers.
3. because of that, Finnish teachers are not living in a Social Worker's Paradise, while the parents of their students must suffer in a dog-eat-dog laissez faire capitalist system, at a much lower standard of living. That promotes EQUALITY and RESPECT between teacher, student and parent.
4. the Finnish school day and year are much longer than in the US. Despite a harsh climate, they have no "snow days", so that lazy union employees can get a free day off with pay.
5. students and teachers EAT TOGETHER for lunch, the same good quality (but plain & simple) homecooked meals. Teachers do not run away to their own "lounge" to hide from students whom they hold in contempt.
Those are just a few of the reasons their schools THRIVE and our FAIL.
1
Concerned Citizen: You have obviously not spent a great deal of time as a teacher or as an administrator in U.S. public schools. My first suggestion is that you spend several years as a substitute, gaining first hand experience in various schools and at various levels, then get back to us. And BTW, be sure to only accept 35% less for your sub pay! Maybe you can get Zuckerberg to tag along.
1
These are all great innovations, and much-needed. I have the distinct feeling, however, that our history, Constitution and principles of free market economics are getting lost in the process.
7
Perhaps a more insightful article could be written by the Times on actual research on the topic of student learning. They would find that studies such as this one (http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0034654316687036, helpfully summarized at https://fredrikdeboer.com/2017/05/16/study-of-the-week-what-actually-hel... show that tutoring by actual humans, not screens, is the best method to improve student performance.
210
It also improves critical thinking and analysis, something that students are not getting through interaction with a machine.
4
In defense of the Times, they often quote and publish op-eds by Diane Ravitch https://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/diane-ravitch who at least has a PhD and understands how to distinguish a scientific study from a marketing pitch.
If that's not enough, add Valerie Strauss in the Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/valerie-strauss/
If that's not enough, add Valerie Strauss in the Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/people/valerie-strauss/
The link to the summary didn't work. Here it is: https://fredrikdeboer.com/2017/05/16/study-of-the-week-what-actually-hel...
Thanks for sharing this.
Thanks for sharing this.
This should be concerning to all. The new monopolists of our time are these companies that are now focusing on influencing a primary force in our democracy: public education.
60
I think Silicon Valley is worried that as a country we are not producing enough STEM college graduates. With the size of our country this is a perplexing dilemma but in the end the problem is the lack of national educational standards and a resistance to these standards. Many countries around the world place an emphasis on math and science in their educational programs and the advantage might be that their programs provide the same curriculum for all the students in their public system. Alas, the majority of the students receive the same level of education throughout the country regardless of the parents socio-economic status.
The future job market will be technology driven. If a large segment of our population is not well prepared, the standard of living for many of our citizens will drop and with this drop many social ills will follow. Lets fix the issues with our educational system now or we will have to face the consequences later.
Lets party on!
The future job market will be technology driven. If a large segment of our population is not well prepared, the standard of living for many of our citizens will drop and with this drop many social ills will follow. Lets fix the issues with our educational system now or we will have to face the consequences later.
Lets party on!
3
"Mr. Hastings described DreamBox as a tool teachers could use to gain greater insights into their students, much the way that physicians use medical scans to treat individual patients. “A doctor without an X-ray machine is not as good a doctor,”"
This analogy seems quite inappropriate as it assumes every child needs an "X-ray" to determine their "treatment." We don't X-ray people constantly to monitor their health, nor should we delegate assessment of students to a constant stream of software or algorithmic appraisals. I think most teachers are perfectly capable of gaining "insight" into their students without needing an algorithm to do it for them. I'm no luddite, but I am extremely tired of hearing VCs and Silicon Valley billionaires telling us how data-gathering and computer-based learning will save us.
Understanding technology is very important for students, and I agree that kids should be familiar with computer science from an early age... but as a subject taught, not a technology used to determine (often with inherent bias) how competent, knowledgeable or intelligent a student is. Students need to have many skills, not just an ability to code, or win at gamified learning modules on a computer. Our schools shouldn't become training grounds for future code workers—cogs in the algorithmic machine, but I get the impression this is exactly what these billionaires are aiming for.
This analogy seems quite inappropriate as it assumes every child needs an "X-ray" to determine their "treatment." We don't X-ray people constantly to monitor their health, nor should we delegate assessment of students to a constant stream of software or algorithmic appraisals. I think most teachers are perfectly capable of gaining "insight" into their students without needing an algorithm to do it for them. I'm no luddite, but I am extremely tired of hearing VCs and Silicon Valley billionaires telling us how data-gathering and computer-based learning will save us.
Understanding technology is very important for students, and I agree that kids should be familiar with computer science from an early age... but as a subject taught, not a technology used to determine (often with inherent bias) how competent, knowledgeable or intelligent a student is. Students need to have many skills, not just an ability to code, or win at gamified learning modules on a computer. Our schools shouldn't become training grounds for future code workers—cogs in the algorithmic machine, but I get the impression this is exactly what these billionaires are aiming for.
69
@ Mrs. Smith
You have correctly stated the first step in identifying the motive in almost any seemingly philanthropic act. Follow the money. Follow the money also explains most other actions of businesses when you ask, what is in it it for them?
You have correctly stated the first step in identifying the motive in almost any seemingly philanthropic act. Follow the money. Follow the money also explains most other actions of businesses when you ask, what is in it it for them?
2
Some of the methods described in this article seem to be high tech versions of the self-paced instruction used at my Catholic school back in the early 70's. The students would all be told to go to the "learning center" to pick out cardboard cards with reading and math lessons on them. Some of the male students competed with each other to see how many levels of SRA (brand name of the cardboard cards) they each could complete. When I figured out that the nuns never complimented me when I, a female, completed an SRA unit, I did the bare minimum number of lessons required to keep myself out of trouble and then hid in the corner reading Nancy Drew books. My strategy placed me consistently in the 99th percentile on elementary school standardized tests of reading ability. (I learned math from my father, an engineer who made me add up the grocery bills mentally before we reached the checkout counter.) Unfortunately, one of my classmates was not as lucky as I was. His mother found out that he was unable to read when he reached the end of the third grade! As stated in the article, self-paced instruction isn't a substitute for close interaction with a good teacher.
146
SRA! I remember that. It was awful. We did the same thing in our school - it was a contest to see who could get through a unit first. We didn't really care whether we understood the lessons or learned anything. It certainly did not help my already shaky math skills.
9
Ha! The lesson also is that Nancy Drew books were great reading--I loved them myself--and reading voraciously for enjoyment can help build those necessary reading skills much better than doing those "cards." I remember those too--ugh! I hid books inside many a boring 70's trendy-lesson--yay to being a rebellious reader! :)
2
I remember SRAs for reading very well. I got in trouble for reading real books on my lap instead. The real books were interesting. The short stories on the SRA color-coded cards were not.
State funding does provide enough to meet the budget requirements a school district needs. Schools rely on volunteers and donations to make ends meet. I like the financial involvement of the tech giants to help the schools with funding. Even though the teaching methods didn't have the ability to cover the many learning styles and levels of interests and commitments children possess, it is a great start for conversations and encouraging community involvement in the schools.
1
The wide range of success and failure in our schools is one reason tech donors and profit-seekers have found fertile ground in education. We the public have allowed our children to plod along in an antiquated system. We move to "better" districts if we can afford it, leaving poorer families behind. The tech billionaires are supreme examples of the rich getting richer, though some are certainly attempting to reach into homes world-wide.
At the same time, it is hard to bemoan attempts to improve an ailing system. The idea of students "owning" their learning is crucial - but we are still trying to frame it in the same old paradigm, so too often kids do rush through an automated lesson. Teachers remain more than crucial, but we can't expect moving them to a helpmate stance without more substantial re-education to be efficacious for the students -- teachers have to be learners as well.
We are in transition -- technology and billionaires are one expression of how the times are changing. Hopefully, we'll see even more.
At the same time, it is hard to bemoan attempts to improve an ailing system. The idea of students "owning" their learning is crucial - but we are still trying to frame it in the same old paradigm, so too often kids do rush through an automated lesson. Teachers remain more than crucial, but we can't expect moving them to a helpmate stance without more substantial re-education to be efficacious for the students -- teachers have to be learners as well.
We are in transition -- technology and billionaires are one expression of how the times are changing. Hopefully, we'll see even more.
2
This is all great, however, I don't see anything about music in the schools, and without music and the arts, imaginations, a sense of curiosity, and the struggles to overcome difficult problems can be lost in the wind. I urge these philanthropists to continue their work, but to also take the necessary risks of placing musical instruments in students hands. Let the kids dance, sing, write, act, and draw. Then step back and watch what happens.
37
And the response of the tech-enthralled will be, "Oh, but there's an app for that!"
8
YES! IF these guys want to be helpful - why not put the arts back into schools where they have been cut.
2
I would welcome their free money to change and affect our school systems. But I would not accept that they can take the money as part of their donation for federal tax deduction purpose. One cannot eat their cake and toppings the same time.
8
It seems that the more we mess with education, beginning when I was a kid with the New Math, the worse it gets. I think one reason that Catholic schools were historically pretty successful was that they were forced by lack of resources to stick to the proverbial basics, plus the benefit of not having to worry about state testing and teaching to the test.
A good general background in math, science and humanities gives kids the ability to be lifelong learners.
A good general background in math, science and humanities gives kids the ability to be lifelong learners.
83
Clearly philanthropic dollars buy influence. But these philanthropists appear to me to have nothing more than the best interests of the students in mind. What's more, let's remember that no school is required to accept donations from Silicon Valley, or elsewhere. So school boards, principals and teachers must believe that these efforts are worthwhile. How does that "subvert the democratic process?" as one critic claims?
2
Regardless of any actual progress in educational methods this is another example of government by elected officials being replaced by plutocracy. The money flowing in from these people encourages local and state governments to cut taxes still further.
Many people in these high-tech fields were successful in their own business because they had the one right idea in the right time and place or they may have been a little ahead of others with the same idea. This does not mean that they have some special genius or methodology which can solve quite unrelated problems.
Many people in these high-tech fields were successful in their own business because they had the one right idea in the right time and place or they may have been a little ahead of others with the same idea. This does not mean that they have some special genius or methodology which can solve quite unrelated problems.
630
As long as public education is funded by real-estate taxes, the systems are doomed to failure (or mediocrity at best). Education needs to be funded broadly, maybe a national sales or VAT tax, and maybe then someday wealthy and poor children will again go to the same schools...
3
Indeed, this viewpoint has already been proven repeatedly as one attempt after another to "fix" education by billionaires has failed.
You might think that finding good companies in education and then supporting them would be good for education. However, such support puts a large thumb on the scales of commerce and tends to shut out a company with weaker PR that has a much better idea. In other words, it tends to destroy the workings of the free market and stifle innovation.
What these billionaires should be doing is to provide the means to test any learning educational technology company's product in schools. It's difficult and expensive for a startup to do this. Publish all results. A company that fails the test can either fold up or redesign its product and try again. Mixed results will tell companies how to improve their products. Good results will tell schools where to look to find good products and also help startups both to generate revenue and to improve -- because even good results will not be perfect.
You might think that finding good companies in education and then supporting them would be good for education. However, such support puts a large thumb on the scales of commerce and tends to shut out a company with weaker PR that has a much better idea. In other words, it tends to destroy the workings of the free market and stifle innovation.
What these billionaires should be doing is to provide the means to test any learning educational technology company's product in schools. It's difficult and expensive for a startup to do this. Publish all results. A company that fails the test can either fold up or redesign its product and try again. Mixed results will tell companies how to improve their products. Good results will tell schools where to look to find good products and also help startups both to generate revenue and to improve -- because even good results will not be perfect.
1
"Administrators in some districts said that students so enjoyed the math program that some had begged their parents to let them play DreamBox even during trips to the supermarket" . You don't think such apps will accelerate math learning? I think they will. Many other subjects can be taught with apps and improve outcome more than chalkboard lessons.
1
"Some tech leaders believe that applying an engineering mind-set can improve just about any system, and that their business acumen qualifies them to rethink American education."
Sounds like "government should be run like a business" and "as an MBA, you don't need to know the underlying business."
What could go wrong there?
Sounds like "government should be run like a business" and "as an MBA, you don't need to know the underlying business."
What could go wrong there?
170
Yeah, perhaps a business leader should run the the United States government.
What could go wrong?
What could go wrong?
2
I would much rather see the tech people influencing our schools and education than Betsy DeVoss and the Koch brothers.
15
But, of course (no pun intended, but made), that puts the cart before the horse.
I would much rather see teachers and education experts influencing education. I would much rather see people with a background in education, influencing education. And I would much prefer if Silicon Valley could stay the heck out of influencing education, altogether. Tech as a tool is great. Tech as the teacher is not. Neither is experimenting on America's students with various software programs.
11
It would nice to see curious and hardworking learners to be role models for the young. Those people are not necessarily ed-school credentialed.
Fascinating and exciting in many ways. But frighteningly dark if Betsy DeVoss continues to strip funding from schools and abdicate curriculum leadership to the highest bidders or worse . . .
Do we want the next generation to grow up with whatever ideals hi tech corporations want to instill? Such partnerships should be managed to ensure open access and the broad choices for learners.
Do we want the next generation to grow up with whatever ideals hi tech corporations want to instill? Such partnerships should be managed to ensure open access and the broad choices for learners.
7
The implementation of Dreambox results in active discouragement of children from asking teachers or parents for help while they are working through the software. Children are directed to use the "help" button, and parents and teachers are told not to help them, but to direct them to the help button as doing otherwise will mess up the algortihm. Our school district uses Dreambox in every school, grades K-5. Personalized learning and relying on an algorithm diminishes the role of human interactions, which are essential for learning and well-being for children.
186
Our school used Dreambox as well, and its nothing special and didn't really help our kids. There are lower cost and free alternatives out there if you simply want the kids to drill for test prep -- which is what Dreambox is.
1
Excuse me if I sound skeptical.
All these tech billionaires shoehorning their not inconsiderable influence into public schools is like the Gold rush prospectors trying to introduce panhandling techniques into schools.
The most important 'skill' that a child needs is fearlessness towards learning. Anything, but also about themselves. !2 years of schooling should be able to inculcate belief in their own ability to determine their future and discriminate between what is right and wrong, for themselves and in relationship to the world at large.
No program can do that. No specific skill set can do. Enlightened and energetic, enthusiastic and involved *teachers* can.
You want to make schools better? Support and educate, treat and value *teachers*. It is their tireless humanity that will support the young minds in the best way possible.
Support community libraries. Support community building. So the human element thrives, not your pocketbooks alone.
Thank you.
All these tech billionaires shoehorning their not inconsiderable influence into public schools is like the Gold rush prospectors trying to introduce panhandling techniques into schools.
The most important 'skill' that a child needs is fearlessness towards learning. Anything, but also about themselves. !2 years of schooling should be able to inculcate belief in their own ability to determine their future and discriminate between what is right and wrong, for themselves and in relationship to the world at large.
No program can do that. No specific skill set can do. Enlightened and energetic, enthusiastic and involved *teachers* can.
You want to make schools better? Support and educate, treat and value *teachers*. It is their tireless humanity that will support the young minds in the best way possible.
Support community libraries. Support community building. So the human element thrives, not your pocketbooks alone.
Thank you.
286
Well said Luna I couldn't agree more!
4
Nothing is new again. I went to a Ford Foundation funded alternative high school back in the late 60's early 70's. Pretty much the same concept as described for Summit, self guided learning with support. Some of us zoomed though, some did nothing until they finally realized that they were the only ones left from their class - the teachers had to be prepared to let kids fail and learn from that. Pretty much all of us went on to be well rounded adults and attend college, though some did it latter, which is also a good thing as it turns out- we traveled , worked and became adults, not a continuum of studenthood. I also lived through math unipacks in jr high (failed until they added a contract for completion- I "completed" geometry in summer school and was really annoyed to find that I could do a whole year in 6 weeks when I put my nose to the grindstone- and SRA reading units in elementary, which was very competitive among the girls to be top reader. What the public schools fail to do and I see in the concepts being reintroduced by the tech leaders- is teach you how to learn, which is a two way process, instead of being instructed which is information being handed down unquestioned. The force feeding required to get kids through the disastrous Common Core based testing these days has pretty much eliminated any smidgen of creativity or real learning. It's regurgitation, not learning.
1
What all these men (any surprise there?) have managed to do is *monetize* on the addictive nature of screen based interactions, which have pretty much devolved into screen based existence for large swaths of the population.
Is it any surprise they would not want such a dependency started earlier and earlier on?
This is like giving the FDC seal of approval over to the drug warlords who want to make baby formula.
Speaking as a technologist who tried to bring a piagetian and papertian approach to technology in education more than twenty years ago, as one of the earliest creators and researchers in the field of tangible programming, I can't stress enough NOT to give these bully-pulpit technocrats any more say in the education of our youth.
I walked away from the field willingly for I simply did not want to spend a moment more in a field more driven by greed than creativity, hubris than humility or even humanity. but they have gained all this power, because an increasingly screen addled and addicted population would continue to worship them in the altar of monetary and monetised 'success'.
We all get the overlords we deserve. But that is no reason not to wake-up now.
Is it any surprise they would not want such a dependency started earlier and earlier on?
This is like giving the FDC seal of approval over to the drug warlords who want to make baby formula.
Speaking as a technologist who tried to bring a piagetian and papertian approach to technology in education more than twenty years ago, as one of the earliest creators and researchers in the field of tangible programming, I can't stress enough NOT to give these bully-pulpit technocrats any more say in the education of our youth.
I walked away from the field willingly for I simply did not want to spend a moment more in a field more driven by greed than creativity, hubris than humility or even humanity. but they have gained all this power, because an increasingly screen addled and addicted population would continue to worship them in the altar of monetary and monetised 'success'.
We all get the overlords we deserve. But that is no reason not to wake-up now.
2
How hypocritical of tech billionaires to influence public education when they send their own children to low-tech and often private schools like Waldorf or Montessori and limit their own kids' screen and tech time. Teachers have to teach children of all abilities and challenges and manage complex social-emotional and socioeconomic needs which cannot be solved with an "App".
My child's elementary school using and online math program and the animated and game-like components are distracting. Kids find ways to 'game' the system to be ahead on the 'leaderboard'. Reading is done on e-books and kids just tab through quickly to finish their assignments. Penmanship is atrocious. Concentration on tasks like reading and critical thinking and reasoning is lacking. School can be interesting and engaging without relying on electronic gadgets and the solitude of sitting in front of a screen.
My child's elementary school using and online math program and the animated and game-like components are distracting. Kids find ways to 'game' the system to be ahead on the 'leaderboard'. Reading is done on e-books and kids just tab through quickly to finish their assignments. Penmanship is atrocious. Concentration on tasks like reading and critical thinking and reasoning is lacking. School can be interesting and engaging without relying on electronic gadgets and the solitude of sitting in front of a screen.
433
I tend to agree with abc from SF. Experimenting with Google Chromebook in the schools here in Savannah worries me. My children say that having all work done through Google Classroom on computers is distracting. It is nice to have all work in one place, but the screens offer constant ads and temptations. Schools do not subscribe i.e. pay for many of the applications and so children are asked to set up trial accounts over and over which then loses their work after 30 days. The programs are too many and constantly changing. It is confusing as parent and child to manage so many passwords for their work. Are we experimenting with our children and not giving them what they really need, face to face learning and human rather than screen connectivity? I am all for innovation in the classroom, but not experimentation that fosters large scale childhood consumer loyalty without critical questioning. This seems to need more input before rushing to implementation.
18
well said and thank you!
3