Perhaps an unmentioned issue is a confusion and dwindling sense of purpose/meaning in predominantly European-American populations such the ones that exist in these communities, communities that my own family immigrated to on land grants given before and after the Civil War. What, are we/they supposed to believe that East and South Asian-driven STEM fetish is the solution to all of America's problems? Am I supposed to believe that if my son or daughter cannot out compete a newly arrived immigrant (or H-1B holder) from the East and South Asian communities that they are "losers" at worst and in need of being sent to a "STEM re-education center" at best? Am I supposed to believe that "computer technology = progress" and that the demographic shift in the United States, free trade agreements, and billionaire driven global corporatism, over the past four decades is wonderful for everyone in the country? What if computer technology and the STEM fetish is just another way for one population who is good at these things to show their dominance over other populations who are less good at them? What if, in the end, people with the most power and money (like Zuckerberg and, now I guess by extension, Chan) can do little more than impose their own prejudices and wills on others, no matter how well intentioned?
14
A further complication: not all people, but there are some people, who are sensitive (negatively) to electronic radiation, from a whole variety of sources, including simple computers. Practically no-one is talking about that—perhaps because they refuse to see it.
We need to start talking about the role of emf radiation especially in young people’s lives.
12
Welcome to Kansas.
The narrative is familiar to anybody who watches how Republicans "govern". Slash taxes. Bust unions. Lie about corruption and cronies. Lie about the results. Pound the table about "liberals" and "atheists". Rinse and repeat.
My advice to parents who are unhappy about this is to move to a state that values civilized society, including public education, insists that its elected officials do the same, and collects taxes accordingly.
I have no doubt that this technology is flawed. That isn't the problem, it's a a symptom.
The problem is the culture of Kansas.
61
All true. But the article is about computer based learning. Any parent can see that too much screen time is bad for kids.
4
Gov. Brownback gutted school budgets to criminal low levels during his tenure. Now Gov. Kelly is fighting to make room in the budget to fund schools at acceptable levels. At some point it will not be viable to have an exponentially growing population of uneducated people that only consume and reproduce according to some tragic manifest destiny plan that is not connected with reality. People must focus on sharing the planet.
21
"Silicon Valley has tried to remake American education in its own image for years, even as many in tech eschew gadgets and software at home and flood into tech-free schools. "
I especially love this (sarcasm alert)... does anyone else see the absolute nauseating hypocrisy in this? My lord, do they actually believe any of the garbage that they spew when they're peddling their products? I swear, that cave in Nepal is looking better and better by the day.
26
“There’s people who don’t want change. They like the schools the way they are,” she said. “The same people who don’t like Summit have been the sort of vocal opposition to change throughout the process.”
If only these rubes could understand our 'best practices'? /s
9
The valley sends it's children to low or no tech charter schools.
33
I have no problem with computer-aided education...but the key word is "aided." The Internet is a wonderful resource, but it is just that, a "resource." The idea that Summit could be an actual substitute for student/ teacher interaction and instruction and that Facebook of all platforms would be the appropriate entity to even attempt to develop such, is inane.
No it's not "nostalgia" to insist that our children learn "the old fashioned way" - i.e. principally by student teacher engagement and via interaction in class time with other students.
Things like the "give-and-take" that's required for effective collaboration and problem-solving and exploring shades of meaning (rather than simply getting the "right answer"), having a qualified professional monitor and mentor a student regarding his/her progress -- just cannot be replaced by a computer or computer program.
Sure technology can and should be an aid, or a subject of study...but not the modality for learning. (Human) teachers can make a huge difference in a student's life; it's precisely this - the human transmission of ideas, the confidence-building that occurs through teacher-student dialogue, using methods that masters like Socrates pioneered, cannot be swapped out for programs like Summit - which appear not even to be open-source, and hence are an attempt to "corner" the world of education as if it were a market. It is not.
21
This is so, so sad, in so many ways. It almost makes me cry. It's positively dystopian. I bet Mr. Z and his (pediatrician) wife wouldn't plunk their own little darling in front of a screen for 10 hours a day, with an "individualized" curriculum and no meaningful interaction with the teacher or fellow students, and would realize that anyone selling that as "education" is a scoundrel and con artist.
I've really had it up to here with Zuckerberg. I used to give him the benefit of the doubt re good intentions, plus he's young, an idealist, and just didn't really quite know what he was unleashing ... But this is quite openly malevolent, in my opinion. ANYONE in education would know this isn't education, this is utterly cynical and mercenary.
52
Nothing new here. Wealthy people believe that their success in one domain, regardless of whether that success was due to their own efforts, translates into expertise in other areas. And, people listen to them because....after all, they’re rich' so they must be smart. The examples of this fallacious way of thinking are all around us.
22
I am a parent of children at a K-8 charter school in Oakland, CA that uses Summit for grades 6-8. I would describe Summit as a learning travesty for students.
I am disappointed that the article didn't spend time on what Summit actually is. When Summit is presented to parents by school staff, it is presented as a fabulous, innovative tool. Something that will set our school apart, something that is designed for everyone because it is learning at your own pace. And it's project based learning, the new buzz words in education.
This is what summit really is: hours of staring at a computer, hours of watching youtube videos and kahn academy videos to "learn." Need to learn the capitols of the fifty states? Watch this youtube video that will teach them to you by singsong!
Worse, my kids' school is a Mandarin immersion school. So in middle school, their curriculum is still 50-70% in Mandarin, which Summit does not offer. So it has to be supplemented and amended constantly.
The teachers are not on top of how a child is doing. You might be shocked to learn your child has an incomplete in a subject because they have failed a test on Ancient Greece eight times, but nobody noticed or helped the child move along.
The students and parents hate summit. It's created anxiety in students. Those who remain are simply committed to learning Mandarin. The school's middle school population is dropping drastically each year. One parent described Summit best: it's a total net negative.
35
“Summit demands an extraordinary amount of personal information about each student and plans to track them through college and beyond,” said Leonie Haimson, co-chairwoman of the Parent Coalition for Student Privacy, a national organization.
In re: to the Summit software being "free", I'm going to paraphrase another well-known software mogul: "It depends on what your meaning of the word 'free' is".
The only thing Facebook is interested in is making $. So as so many have said about FB: "You, the user, subscriber, clicker-on-links-to-advertisements, are The Product".
I'm sure those folks who think schoolteachers are vastly overpaid and have too many benefits and belong to a union will be thrillled to see those same teachers replaced by a screen.
15
Why does "self-directed learning" have to be entirely "on-line"? What happened to spending time in the stacks at the library, visiting museums, and field trips? My son has on numerous occasions informed me how much more he learns on his own as compared to the time he spends in a college classroom. Some of it he learns by reading books, some by watching on-line videos, and mostly by following the things he's interested in. Zuckerberg should simply donate the laptops and allow schools and pupils to use them as they see fit. A lap top and the internet are tools. Powerful tools, but still only tools. The person using the tools, the student, creates, learns and sculpts. It's like telling a painter, use only this brush and this color of paint. Ridiculous.
15
You what 'personalized' education is? It's when a person (a 'teacher') observes another person (a 'student') in person and perceives by the student body language what that student is 'getting' and what escaping the student's understanding. Then the teacher immediately modifies their 'teaching' to use a different way of trying to get the material across. Good teaching is not just the teacher's understanding of the material, it is also the teacher's understanding of their students, as individual people. Any teaching methodology that separates the teacher and the student and does, therefore, allow the teacher to observe the students, is therefore inferior. This is why small classes are so important.
17
'"We wanted to get every kid on an even playing field,” said Brian Kynaston, a dentist in McPherson and school board member, adding that it helped that Summit was free.'
If Kansas (and other states) would actually start fully funding their public schools again then they might not need such free support from the outside.
29
I'm a longtime registered independent who has never before written a news story comment. But I could not let pass my amazement at the blazing anger of the Kansas parents toward the tech industry and their own school system. Aren't they the very people who enthusiastically voted in politicians who campaigned clearly on a platform of radical tax cuts? Now that their economy is in ruins and state funding for schools has crashed, some localities have turned to high tech for help. So if that doesn't work, stop it, of course. The problem remains: You get what you pay for.
My children have been educated in the excellent public schools of Brookline, MA, and my neighbors and I continue to vote for tax-cap overrides to increase public school funding. Yup, my taxes are real high. And what do I get for it? Uh, kids who get into good colleges, high and rising property values because good public schools make our town hyper-desirable, clean streets, terrific police and fire protection. I could go on. But you get the point. In the end, you really do get what you pay for.
83
Do other advanced nations have a system like Summit and how is it received elsewhere? Is this just an American issue?
The real question is: How do the Chinese manage their educational system? Are we on par with them? Is Summit helping in that regard?
2
Zuckerberg has proven, in front of Congress no less, that he is not a man of integrity. He lies...sometimes directly and sometimes through omission. And he's a professional manipulator! Why, oh why, would we ever let him touch the education of our children? We've become too susceptible to "quick and easy", and quality education takes time and hard work.
19
"Altruism" and "Facebook" are two terms that cannot coexist in harmony. Zuckerberg's and Chan's "benevolence" always comes with strings attached.
9
I run a Boys & Girls Club filled with kids flailing and failing in the traditional schools. I dream about an approach like this for them. Maybe the secret is applying this approach where it will be emraced as an alternative to a failing market. Mr. Zuckerberg please call!
11
Summit is probably better suited for adult students.
10
Who is Facebook selling the student information to that they collect.?
11
The Summit approach to public education dovetails nicely with Devos pushing for charter schools and talk of Universal Basic Income.
People who have lots of money don't want to pay for public education -- ostensibly for the people who don't have lots of money. Some people view public education as another entitlement, like social security or medicare.
This, in contrast to the entitelments that they approve of, like giving the wealthiest people and businesses huge tax breaks, or not paying their fair share of taxes, or not helping to fund affordable housing and public schools in the communities where they buy huge amounts of land to support their ever expanding enterprises. Oh wait, we don't need public schools, we have summit.
Ask yourself this, what percentage of the top 1% in Silicon Valley send their children to public schools? They arefollowong the latest research on education and brain development. They don't want their kids on screens all day. They know it's harmful.
17
A quality education is more complex than a computer program or even a well-mapped, printed curriculum. Nor does student motivation automatically unwrap like a boxed gift. Genuine learning is a dynamic, evolving process; a science and a craft. Most would agree that appropriate materials to meet learning needs, and lower student/teacher ratios are positive steps forward. Yet, there's more to the equation. Blend in quality teachers, cared for students, and interactive, respectful communities. These factors often produce highly valued, educational results, several of which standardized tests cannot measure.
6
Do anyone honestly believe for one minute that Facebook and its affiliates are not collecting all kinds of data from the school kids for use once these kids are adults (or perhaps while they are minors)? 15+ years of data on millions of kids, with a new crop of data to harvest every year. I would be willing to bet that they have done a cost benefit analysis of any fines that they might have to pay IF they get caught and the benefits (profits!) dwarf any potential fines. The potential for abuse should cause great pause and scrutiny. And with Facebook's "track record", it should not get the benefits of any doubts.
15
“Change rarely comes without some bumps in the road,” said Gordon Mohn, McPherson’s superintendent of schools. He added, “Students are becoming self-directed learners and are demonstrating greater ownership of their learning activities.”
Sounds like the superintendant is capable of delivering talking points as directed by Summit. I wonder if his pay is on commission like an instragram influencer.
19
This article, like many others on tech in classrooms, points to a much larger and more sinister problem: The overarching use of school children for technology experiments. The "scientists" conducting these experiments are businesspeople who do not have to get IRB approval, go through CITI certification, or do other ethics training real social scientists require. Schools are willing participants because they're vulnerable, wanting any sort of relief from bad test scores (which is yet another ethical issue). There's no unbiased informed consent forms, no opt-outs without consequences, and little by the way of protections for minors, a designated vulnerable population. The notion of letting for-profit companies introduce their products to schools as "free samples", even if you assumed the company was not covertly advertising, is highly ethically questionable. Companies and schools can't afford to be wrong about their tech ventures, these are human minds and lives they are toying with. If progress means accepting potentially maladjusted adults made at the hands of their devices, we need to rethink what progress looks like.
13
"Tom Kane, the Harvard professor preparing that assessment, said he was wary of speaking out against Summit because many education projects receive funding from Mr. Zuckerberg and Dr. Chan’s philanthropic organization, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative."
This quote is terrifying on so many levels. If a tenured professor and research director at Harvard University can be intimidated by Zuckerberg and his wife what chance do we have? Does everything that Facebook touches eventually die?
27
Anything that takes interactions among people out of schools should be either suspect or else be avoided. And any teacher who does not like making lesson plans is in the wrong profession.
In a related phenomenon, decades ago a craze swept through education on the premise that it would eliminate personal bias and produce more neutral and honest results. It was an interview process that was claimed to enable superintendents and other people in charge of hiring to locate the best people. With it the interviewer asked a set of prescribed questions with no opportunity to ask follow up ones that he/she might like to ask. All very neat and tidy and able, without individual coloring of results, to pinpoint the best candidates. Districts bought into this.
It didn't take too long for people to figure out that the premise was spurious and the program needed to be tossed out and to reinsert personal interactions. If you have a director of personnel or superintendent who cannot figure out which people are the ones he/she ought to be hiring, then that person, too, is in the wrong profession.
There is no substitute for capable, imaginative, and energetic people in any organization, education most certainly.
6
There is a real conflict of cultures going on here. I'm a PhD-trained engineer and genomics researcher for whom computers have been a vital tool for decades. I spent a week working in McPherson and its environs in the 1970's. I found these Kansans to be smart, so I would counsel them to focus on teaching their kids the basics: reading writing and 'rithmetic, and perhaps an intro to a foreign language. I have to admire Zuckerberg/Chan for their accomplishments and being well-intentioned, but they are the last people that I would want to guide my children's education. Indeed, if they want to guide children, they should start by adopting some of their own.
11
A large part of early education is the process of socialization which allows each child to learn how to communicate effectively with others, and how to function as a member of society. Effective teachers also serve as adult role models.
These self-directed educational processes help create the social isolation and sociopathic tendencies which we are seeing more and more in our society.
Teaching computer theory and skills is increasingly important in today's world, but teaching civics and social democracy is even more crucial. The approach utilized by Summit is exactly what will destroy our social structure.
15
This story has two sides, but the comments come from the extremes.
Yes, educational technology can boost student learning.
No, many online programs don't work well, and too much screen time can be harmful.
Personalized learning sounds great, and computers with AI should be able to deliver on its promise, but it hasn't done well yet.
On the other side, we must overcome the tendency of teachers, students, and even parents to support memory-based classes. For anyone used to this approach, the requirement of actual thinking represents hard work and will be resented.
Whatever program we use in our schools must adhere to this concept. I really don't know enough about Summit to judge it, but the description in this article implies that the same learning style prevails with only the pace and amount of remedial work varying from student to student. That would be a waste of good technology equipment.
3
Do we really want to make Mark Zuckerberg and the tech world value system a model for our children? If he’ so desperate to avoid taxes through his “philanthropic” foundation and divert attention from the harm his phenomenally lucrative Frankenstein has done to society, he can seek projects that involve input from the stakeholders his master-of-the-universe projects would affect. His arrogant attempt to “save” the Newark public school system several years ago was a failure, due to his hubris and failure to involve the community. Or how about building affordable housing in San Francisco and Silicon Valley so that young people and working families can afford to live there and create the demand for quality pre-K-12 public education that includes tech proficiency as part of the curriculum?
8
another good idea -- using technology to adapt instruction to the needs of diverse students -- blown up with good intentions. many teachers would be grateful for technology that allowed them to provide extra practice for students who need it, while allowing enrichment for others. and some students (i suspect Zuckerberg is one) -- but probably not most -- would be fine working alone on a computer all the time. what does this say about the kind of learning is important? and, if Mr. Zuckerberg is an example, just what kind of people are we shooting for?
2
This reminds me of the fancy new math cart program my school adopted when I was in fifth grade in 1975. Several carts full of shiny erasable math folders were descended upon by students with eraser rags and black crayons, who "worked at their own pace," with teachers having a consultant role. That didn't last long. Kids this age need to be taught through active engagement with the teacher. Screen time can be used for practice, supplementation, and assessment.
6
There is something to be said for turning the pages of a codex, and then turning back to the previous page to look at something again. Clicking through different screens does not have the same cognitive effect. There is also something to be said for trying to solve a math problem, and, half-way through, using your pencil's eraser to undo what you have written, and then write down the correct figures, as you both see and create the correct solution. One cannot do that from a keyboard. There is also much to be said for live, interactive instruction, particularly the Socratic method.
I am an "X-ennial," so I am old enough to remember a primarily book-and-pencil education, but young enough that, starting in high school, most of my courses had online components. While certain aspects of the internet can augment an education, it cannot replace an education.
7
Why not, beginning in the 7th grade, slowly phase-in the computer learning having it augmenting tailored, hands-on, interactive learning from human teachers and have the computer learning increasing so that by the 12th grade, students are better prepared for their freshman year of college? To truly learn, one must also participate. This is a scheme to enrich Facebook shareholders, not to effectively educate for the 21st century.
3
@Michael Blanos: Just how does this educational offering enrich Facebook shareholders? The educator designed curriculum is free. The technical expertise to set up a working network, login, tracking system for the schools is donated by Facebook.
I don't see any source of profits here.
2
The students of the '70s-'90s now run these tech corporations. Before tech in classrooms. Somehow, we did OK. Like, founding high tech companies and alerting the world to climate change despite not having personalized learning. Only we did have personalized learning in the form of human teachers who could recognize and encourage subtle clues in student behavior that would advance their enthusiasm for and success in science and any number of other subjects.
4
The teacher is one of the primary components related to student success. Sometimes students and teachers have personality conflicts but otherwise a good teacher tops computer screens any day of the week. Blue light from computer screens harms vision and overuse is not a good thing. So sad that schools listen to these quack educators. Yes, I taught school 28 years and got both good and bad results but I didn't turn students into zombies.
6
I have a 25 year old and a 19 year old. We are square in the digital age. I also live in a wealthy community with an excellent school system.
Interpersonal skills are deteriorating due to the prolific amount of gadgets one can own. iPhones, iPads, MacBooks, video games and at school Chromebooks. I was recently somewhere in a group of people and almost every single one was looking at their phone. Instead of talking to one another.
This a bad for everyone. We are losing our connections to one another. We have already seen that people will post/write something insulting on facebook or in an email, that they would never dream of doing in person.
As far as Summit learning programs, from what I read in the article I would say some children do well with self directed learning and some don't. To use it as the entire learning process is shortsighted by those in the tech world.
Anyone who's a student today is tech savvy. Most parents are trying to LIMIT screen time, not increase it. What about learning to collaborate with other students? What happens when you never hear other students views and opinions? Computers offer a very narrow way of learning.
And they are marginalizing teachers. It's bad enough we treat teachers as second class citizens in this country. These folks have the future of this country in their classrooms, let them teach, not monitor.
Mentoring is great, but not a teacher's sole purpose.
Using technology as the sole way of learning is just plain wrong.
12
While high school students need to learn how to use the internet as a resource, it is best taught via a human guided course in library science.
Learning to code is useful for some students, but again, this needs to be taught as a subject by a teacher qualified to do so.
Other subjects, art, math, history, etc., do not require screens at all. Kids should work together on tasks set forth by their learning guide - their teacher - to discover and discuss.
Teaching is about curating the endless bits of info to form a cohesive but diverse range of thought on a subject. Just throwing the internet at kids and hoping they will find their way isn't "self-guided learning". It's a recipe for all manner of extremism, the perpetuation of falsehood, and abuse.
And really, the most important thing kids must learn is social skills. Everything about computers, social media, the internet, are destructive to the aim of socialization.
Zuckerburg gained obscene wealth from an addictive, manipulating, psychologically damaging, and dehumanizing commodifier. He cannot be trusted with the minds of our youth.
7
Here's a radical idea: what if these "tech elites" implemented these changes on their own children first?
Of course, they wouldn't. The whole thing is a farce. Tech millionaires are notorious about maximizing privacy, making sure their kids grow up in a tech free environment, and promoting a "holistic" approach to life. It's as if they know they're peddling a digital drug. They're happy about the money they make, so as long as the people they know are not affected.
8
The consequences of allowing our democracy to become a plutocracy. Enough of billionaires with no educational experience or training using their outsized wealth to direct the educational future of millions of children. Enough of actual educators and researchers being too afraid to stand up to the random whims of the ultra wealthy for fear of retribution. The solution is significantly higher tax rates.
5
Let's see here:
Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard
Gates dropped out of Harvard
Jobs dropped out of some school in Oregon
"Woz" dropped out of UC Berkeley
Clearly, these guys were/are smart, but the education system didn't work for them. So what are they going to do? - create an education system that would work for them!
The last thing the U.S. needs is some dissident dropout's version of how to fix education. Unfortunately, education involves teachers, facilities and flexibility.
Schools need money, in Kansas they need a lot of money because the schools have been at the bottom of the political priority list for years.
Someone is going to have to grow wheat, someone is going to have to refine fossil fuels (though we hope that need will go away soon), someone is going to have to put airplanes together, etc. Give kids a toolbox that enriches and inspires their interests and let them become successful on their own.
Giving the public schools money and limiting it's use to things that specifically impact students would go a lot further than imposing an educational system that works for those people who dropped out of the system.
4
I wonder if the information provided by a NYT article from 2011 is still valid? That piece tells us that Silicon Valley Executives send their kids to a private Waldorf school whose
"chief teaching tools are anything but high-tech: pens and paper, knitting needles and, occasionally, mud. Not a computer to be found. No screens at all. They are not allowed in the classroom, and the school even frowns on their use at home."
If this is still true, then...
Here is the article: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/23/technology/at-waldorf-school-in-silicon-valley-technology-can-wait.html
5
Taxpayers often say that their top priority in life is to provide a high quality education to their children.
They don't mean it.
In order to provide a high quality education to their children it takes quality teachers, coaches, counselors, schools, and the public will to pay for it.
Taxpayers refuse to pay.
Enter Mark Zuckerberg, who is taking what money the public is willing to pay for education, and giving them what they asked for.
Cheap education.
You got what you paid for. Why are you complaining?
You can't get something for nothing. There's no such thing as a bargain when it comes to a quality education.
The public has to adopt a mindset that holds politicians responsible at the polls if they really want their children to receive a quality education.
If not, Mark Zuckerberg will still be there to give your children the education that you think they deserve.
5
I have been a University professor for more than 30 years, which means that I know absolutely nothing about education. So take what I say here with a few grains of salt. However, I have taught introductory to graduate level courses in small as well as large classes and mentored numerous undergraduate and graduate students on research projects.
From the invention of writing in ancient Mesopotamia students have been taught in classrooms by teachers in what we now think of as the standard classroom format. Similar methods were used to educate groups of children in ancient Egypt, China, and Mesoamerica. Frequently this method was supplemented with one on one mentoring. Education is expensive but it seems to me to be the very height of hubris to think that computers can do better than and replace teaching methods that seem to have worked for at least 4000 years.
My own recent experience with computer based online learning includes developing an online version of my introductory course. I did this after receiving training through the college of education and had the help of a very computer savvy graduate student. The results were disastrous. Students did not become engaged and the learning levels were much lower than in the face to face format. The University was happy though. They made and continue to make a great deal of money from online courses. This also frees professors, like me, to get on with our real job, which is to write grant proposals and bring in even more money.
19
As recent history has shown time again, when Mark Zuckerberg comes running your way saying, "I have an idea!", we should immediately start running in the opposite direction. Facebook and its spawners have repeatedly shown a blatant disregard for thoroughly thinking projects through--opting instead to experiment on the living and bypassing any concerns of ethics or real human outcomes. Thanks to city-sized data centers and AI, any mistakes they make are weaponized on a massive scale. They may have removed "move quickly and break things" from their corporate motto, but this dangerous ethos is still largely intact.
7
Two anecdotes:
In suburban Illinois in the late 60s, our middle school used self-paced, ‘packaged’ systems to teach social studies: like Summit, but using paper, not computer, platforms. These novel systems comprised physical, not electronic, files, from which students would take the next element of work, and return the previous. Teachers roamed the room and offered personalized guidance as needed or wanted. IIRC the system worked OK.
At Dartmouth College in the mid-70s, Symbolic Logic was taught through the Philosophy Dept. The course was totally via computer, and self-paced; no interaction with the professor occurred unless the student initiated contact. (There were no personal computers til nearly a decade later.) The course was outstanding.
While I understand parents’ objections to the Summit program, the article smears unfairly Silicon Valley in general, and Zuckerberg and Chan in particular. The author wields the tools of division and polarization which have become today so devastatingly prevalent.
Summit is just another attempt to reform and improve education. Such attempts have been made since the dawn of our Republic, whose sustenance relies essentially on the education of our children.
Blaming Silicon Valley, and Zuckerberg-Chan, for shortcomings of Summit, is wrong. The article should be used as a case study in journalism schools, for how to report poorly, by pandering to destructive social memes.
12
It is much better to let the students learn from old text books, if they have them, and reject change because it is different. Were I Zuckerberg, I would let them twist slowly in the wind.
5
Education needs and must have personal contact and empath. Who wants to raise a robot? We get what we pay for. There is an epidemic of loneliness and isolation in this country now.
8
If only all teachers were as good as the limited number of “best” teachers in a school district or in a school building. Too often, teachers — especially in those buildings where we have struggling students — are under-prepared for this job. Some of the newest teachers cannot connect with students and some of the teachers nearing retirement have stopped wanting to connect with students.
This model has promise for lifting some of the burden on the less able teachers, allowing them more time to spend working on their craft and using a vetted curricula to help guide their instruction.
We have had a factory model of education for more than 100 years, and it needs to change because it is not working for so many of the students who need to have an excellent education. Education needs to learn to work through innovations and accept and test points of view from outside the industry, because the American education system has been slow to find remedies on our own. Just look at the persistent rate of low performance for students of color. If some reliance on a computer system, coupled with one on one tutoring help from a well-qualified teacher could work, let’s please try to get to that promising practice.
8
When will we ask the really qualified to help pull our system of education into the future? Look to the teachers, not a quasi dream team of tech engineers, how to engage students in deep and meaningful learning.
5
Why does it have to be all or nothing? Why not start with 1 hour a day?
6
Mark Zuckerberg's arrogant, dishonest leadership of Facebook is proven. Don't let him contaminate our public school learning communities the way he has contaminated internet communities.
7
"online courses don't teach themselves" is a very important statement that Summit seems to never have heard of.
1
This "educational" program is a bad joke.
The real purpose is to tether kids to their screen and get them addicted young.
It won't be long until targeted ads start popping up within the lessons.
7
It is really disgusting to think that education now comes down to clicking a bunch of boxes on a web form and these incipient web monopolies tracking and monitizing your every move. Slow down. Pull a real book off the shelf.
Make a cup of tea. Lose yourself in that book. Discuss it with other human beings in real life. Then go outside and play a few games of hoops and perhaps close your eyes while the sun bathes your face. But alas... it is all about the money in the end. Our computer, social media addicted, soft and obese youth will pay the ultimate price for Mark Zuckerberg's greed and ignorance. Oh yeah... you could also just pay the teachers the same wages as his tech bros.
10
The title to this article is misleading. It should be "Zuckerbergs Came to Kansas Schools". This is a classic case of uneducated behavior by ignorant people with lots of hubris. They are not the only zillionaires who have fallen into the trap of believing because they have all the money they have all the answers. And notice that their solution to education is to get schools, teachers and children hooked on technology so they will buy, buy, buy.
4
The next president of the United States should be:
(A) Donald Trump
(B) Bernie Sanders
(C) Joe Biden
(D) Mark Zuckerberg
Education is best accomplished through strong teacher-student bonds. Individualized instruction can be helpful but should not be the whole curriculum. Under ideal circumstances, the teacher presents the material and asks students to contribute to the discussion and ask questions. When I taught in the classroom, I would always present the material and then let students start on their work. Then I could move around the classroom helping students individually so I could catch mistakes in their understanding. A teacher usually knows which students to look out for but I always found that sometimes even the better students missed out on some aspect of the lesson.
2
For Americans who didn’t get the memo from former (and disgraced) Kansas Governor Sam Brownback, the public sector, all of it, beginning with schools, should be eliminated. He sought to destroy the entire state government of Kansas by eliminating state income taxes on all Kansas businesses and the richest individuals.
So maybe Governor Sam saw Summit as a small but very promising way to speed along his agenda; plug kids into laptops and, in a few years, he could argue that teachers were unnecessary to a Kansas child’s education.
7
The article mentions seizures -- 5% of children suffer from migraine headache, where screen time is often a major trigger for these incapacitating and painful episodes of vomiting, photophobia and excruciating headache. To place any of those children, as well as a child with screen induced seizures in front a computer all day every day is not only an ineffective learning strategy but immoral. What a shame Mr. Zuckerberg's wife, pediatrician Ms. Chan chose to ignore this.
One can question the quality of the software, and that's reasonable, but we can also look around us and listen to the children. Here we heard about anxiety, stress and social isolation. With depression and suicide now at record highs in the US and abroad, can this type of approach possibly be the correct course? Meanwhile, no where are we teaching non violent conflict resolution, which I would submit, is hardly amenable to an "elearning" environment.
There are other deeply troubling facts around this education platform. That Summit themselves refused to participate in the Harvard study and the reason: "wary of speaking out against Summit because many education projects receive funding from Mr. Zuckerberg and Dr. Chan’s philanthropic organization, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative..." is chilling on its own.
Lastly, the idea that "Summit demands an extraordinary amount of personal information about each student and plans to track them through college and beyond" should send red flags flying.
6
@Paul
I appreciate and wholeheartedly agree with your comment about excessive screen time. And I don't believe that a computer based teaching system is best for all classes, such as literature. But from firsthand experience I know that it is for other subjects, particularly sciences. So, I find it ridiculous that people claim to be concerned about the negative impact of of having a student sit before a computer screen for what might be just a few hours (if only used for courses where that teaching approach is most valuable) and yet seemingly are all too willing to allow their children to spend COUNTLESS hours watching TV, playing video games, on computers for social media, or using their cellphones. If they truly believe in the dangers of excessive screentime and the negative impact of the absence of personal interaction as a result of computer usage, then I would suggest that they limit their childs entirely useless time spent on such devices (ie. TV, video games, social media, cellphones, computer pornography searches), rather than arguing to limit the productive educational time on the computer.
2
A major issue not addressed in the article or in any comments I've read thus far is the fact students are exposed to a barrage of radio frequency radiation (RFR), emitted through WiFi and the likely hundreds of wirelessly connected laptops and devices the program depends upon. It's an untenably high level of radiation saturation at very close quarters all day. There's a reference to a student who suffers more freqent epileptic seizures and students complaining of headaches and eye strain but there are many other immediate and long term consequences to high levels of RFR. Zuckerberg, a product of Exeter and Harvard who was likely taught by some of the best teachers in the country, wants to cement dependence on devices and programs that will ensure guaranteed profit to the wireless industry and social media for decades to come.
2
@Martine
I find it ridiculous that people concern about RFR, Wifi and the negative impact of of having a student sit before a computer screen for what might be just a few hours (if only used for courses where that teaching approach is most valuable) and yet seemingly are all too willing to allow those children to spend COUNTLESS hours watching TV, playing video games, on computers for social media, or using their cellphones. If one truly believes in the dangers of radiation or excessive screentime as a result of computer usage, then I would suggest that the place to cut such exposure is in the useless time spent on such devices (ie. TV, video games, social media, cellphones, computer pornography searches), rather than arguing to limit the productive educational time on the computer.
3
This article appears to summarily ignore base rates.
I can’t tell from the article how upset parents usually get when their children are shuttled into in a different type of program than their past experience (my guess is often), and therefore how this would compare to, eg any other change in schooling approach.
It also appears to be calling out edge cases. Clearly if every child suffered from epilepsy and had seizures triggered from screens we shouldn’t use screens in class. Is that a reason to not explore screens in class? We haven’t had smartphones banned from society for similar fears. Are the other examples that were cited more credible or similarly overreaching? I can’t tell.
Given how far behind the US public schools are falling, is it in the public’s best interest to publish anecdotal takedown pieces when new approaches are tried? I’d expect a higher journalistic standard.
8
I spent 30 years in front of computers during my Silicon Valley career. My neck is shot. My back is shot. My elbows hurt. My fingers are numb. My hips hurt. I to to my physical therapist and he says people like me keep him in business. Human beings evolved to run and walk, not to sit all day. School itself is bad enough, but necessary. Add the requirement to stare at a screen for hours, moving nothing but your fingers, and we are setting our kids up for lives filled with suffering.
12
News flash: better public schools cost money.
Former Kansas governor Brownback, now Ambassador-at-Larger for International Religious Freedom, thought huge cut in income tax rates would bring businesses to the Sunflower State. Didn’t happen. Revenues fell, budget deficits grew. And then, funding for public education was cut.
Pay up folks - make Kansas public schools great again!
13
Haven't we put aside the idea that "one size fits all?" How can a computer provide an even playing field for all types of learners? My daughter (who has a visual-spatial learning disability) was blessed with wonderful math teachers in middle school. She was able to learn the curriculum through traditional teaching, art projects, presentations, group projects, etc. No computer learning software can ever replace that experience!
5
Let us not forget that Zuckerberg, a mediocre computer guy, originally designed what was not-yet called Facebook to gauge the "hotness" of Harvard's co-eds. He stole photos from admissions or the health services. Then he stole some ideas from the Olympian Winkelvoss twins. That was it: he then showed great and ruthless business acumen, and got hold of the soul-less Sandberg to run things. He gave however many millions to Newark to improve education and that was a total bust. He allowed Facebook to allow the Russians to saddle us with Trump. Now he wants kids everywhere spending all their time on screens. Does Summit also show ads? Or does that come next?
7
Why did Kansas think they needed to outsource their education methodology? Not too much money in the kitty? How is the low tax system working for you?
9
How many people remember a phrase, or a particular teaching moment that they experienced from a gifted and dedicated teacher, whose comment was specifically tailored to you, the individual, and stayed with them for most of their lives? That's only one of the experiences that are missing from computer based programs. The bottom line for computer based learning systems is the bottom line of the providers, and definitely not for "opening up the minds, or "unlocking" the potential of the student. Such descriptive phrases are mostly self-serving slogans, and no one should be in doubt as to where the truthful intent of computerized learning advocate lie. People learn in one, or a combination of ways, and no cookie cutter program is nearly as sophisticated as a teacher who knows their student on a personal level, and can respond in the moment to the reactions, and needs of that particular student. Why so many people think automation in education is even possible boggles the mind, technologies are nothing more than tools a competent teacher can use with some discretion, and they will never be replacements for what a teacher can provide.
I am puzzled, why is this article so one sided? Many schools teach summit and are doing just fine.
The story uses the anecdotes of a few upset individuals and purveys them as fact, and this leaves me questioning the story's intellectually honesty. This doesn't reflect my experience as a parent who has children attending a school using summit. My daughters are enjoying school for the first time.
9
"Many" is a weasel word. For example, "many" people think Nickelback is the best band ever.
2
@Lorem Ipsum You are discrediting my comment because I typed "many" as opposed to typing "hundreds of schools teaching summit have positive perspectives"?
3
This article is suspect on every level from the selected parent student complaints to clichéd boilerplate responses from Summit. I don’t doubt the veracity of the complaints used in the article but I suspect something else going on. The Summit software is said to be free and possibly on a level that some aren’t used to in terms of curricular difficulty. Like I say, it looks like the article left a few things out.
I remember a long fact based NYT article about the amazing fraud and total chaos involving Ohio public high school education contracts going back a number of years. The massively expensive education contract scams under Gov. Kalish and others and the shear numbers of home schooled and special programs. “New innovative” high school education as a massive in-state fraud from top to bottom.
In Kansas ex-Gov. Brownback was given an job by the Trump U gangster who is now President. Trump paid a reduced 25 million in Trump U fines only because statutes of limitation were exceeded and because of his election.
2
My children have been attending a Summit Charter School in California for 4 years. They are both very smart and can work at their own pace using the Summit playlist. They interact with other students, teachers and their mentors working on projects. We are much happier with Summit than we were with the public elementary school they attended. In elementary school they finished their school work long before everyone else, and then were put to work by their teachers tutoring other students. Summit is not for everyone, but it has been great for my kids.
10
online education should be used to supplement, not replace, the irreplaceable: a vibrant classroom teacher. the most thoughtful and innovated programs for "blended learning" combine online personalized lessons for those who may be behind his/her/their classmates and who might have a different learning style (for example visual learning as opposed to processing conversations), while most of class time is devoted to posing inquiries, on-hands project work and other innovative facets of learning. think of online education as replacing the most rote forms (the stuff that has to be memorized) and use the bulk of class-time for discussion, shared demonstrations, and disagreements. that's how true learning occurs.
4
@Paula: Thank you. You described almost exactly our child's experience in 4 years at a Summit school and captured the core ideas of the educator's program. design.
What we have seen is that the teachers have continuous input on refining and improving the Summit content. That input shows in the high quality of the materials.
1
The hubris of thinking that a teacher and human interaction can be replaced with a computer, and to make that decision unilaterally without first asking those being taught and paying for it.
I work in high tech and I would avoid taking online courses as much as I can even though many are free; in fact, the primary reason to take an adult education course is the human teacher.
I took standardized exams on paper and can imagine the stress of taking them on computer, even though, theoretically, the process is the same.
So glad the students and their parents said no!
6
I find it very telling that we let people who are not cognitive scientists or trained educators experimenting with our children. Do we let herbalists advise at the NIH? Gardeners at the USDA? What is it about non-professionals that makes them think they're experts at educating?
We are letting RICH people engineer society and assuming it's benign. And they happen to make money off of these schemes, which is the most troubling part of this.
Just go to the website for Summit Learning. To learn about the "science" behind their methods, you have to give your email address for the white paper.
It's not in a peer-reviewed journal: it's a white paper, a standard marketing document for a tech company.
6
Listen up students and parents.
Please find a library with real books. Go to a book published in 1964 called Understanding Media, by Marshall McLuhan. In that, McLuhan explains how the medium of communication not only defines the message, it transforms it, sometimes, radically. Which means that education done entirely through the booby screen is not necessarily good for the mind or appropriate for children. The average tech nerd understands only coding and hardware, but not the cognitive science. Faculties of Education once learned it, but they're generally too stupid to remember or apply it.
6
@Tara: Cogent and prescient commentary by Marshall McLuhan. His talks are on YouTube.com and are a gem to watch. He basically predicted what we are seeing today in the Age of Media.
For anyone interested, a good excerpt can be found here: http://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/mcluhan.mediummessage.pdf
2
Such a bad idea. There have been several books and lots of research on the ill effects of the overuse of technology. I despise Zuckerberg. Such a greedy opportunist.
5
I am stunned the New York Times would put this shallow article on the front page. Within a few paragraphs, this writer is accusing the program of causing some kid's seizure because of the amount of computer time spent at school. Seriously? Does the writer know how much time kids normally spend at their computer? For that matter, maybe she should ask herself how much time she spends at the computer.
No one would seriously question that the American education system is in real trouble. We pay too much for too little. Zuckerberg and his wife are trying to use their personal resources to address this problem and yes, it requires some experimentation. Check out the Khan Academy, a similar open source educational program that has now educated millions of people and continues to spread around the globe. Like Summit, these programs allow students to progress at their own pace rather than rely on the antiquated notion that kids should progress in unison. Additionally, this type of system relieves teachers of the burdensome lesson plans usually prepared on their own time. Most importantly, we have all experienced an education where there was one great teacher and a lot of mediocre ones. By using the best teachers in the field to do these videos, we may be able to provide students with memories of "all" their great teachers.
Hey, Kansas, give it a chance. I am sure Summit has at least one good video on religion.
9
@brontesh- well I'm rather stunned by your reply. Zuckerberg needs no more defenders.
The reason we are paying for less and less in education is that state governments are taking money that has been traditionally spent on public schools, mostly your property taxes, and are putting it elsewhere, such as propping up their failing pension systems. There's plenty of money available for education, if only states would spend it here. But they don't. If you want to instantly improve education, go to your state legislature and make them put that money back.
Over 30 years of research and field reports show that multi-media, computer-based learning programs can work as an adjunct but cannot replace teachers in the classroom. That's what these small school districts in Kansas tried to do in order to save money, and it's not working. Also, they are most effective with older, more educated students, and in very specific and narrow subject areas. They do not work well with young children who have no prior, general education, and they cannot replace a teacher-based learning environment. It is very telling that Zuckerberg refused to let Summit be subject to the Harvard study. He and his wife already know what the results would be, and it would not be good for sales.
If this is really your preferred learning option for kids, I hope you enjoy paying for their social welfare for the rest of their lives when we all discover that they did not receive an education by 18. I won't.
1
Dog won't eat the dog food.
Done. Put this in Wash DC area schools it'd be slaughtered, fast.
How'd the teacher's union go for this anyhow? Same pay and benefits but no teaching necessary, just monitor kids on screens 7 hours/day?
1
This sounds like absolutely the worst thing we could to try educate our kids. We need more well qualified teachers, smaller class sizes and increased funding for public education at all levels. We also need the will to pay for it and I'm not sanguine about that. As a culture, we really don't value education very highly. It will take a major culture shift to really make a difference. And handing out laptops to kids isn't a start.
4
Astonishingly horrible on so many levels: the audacity of Zuckerberg to think that he can and should shape American public education; the willingness of same Zuckerberg to use other people's children as guinea pigs; the willingness of a Kansas schoolboard to swallow without question a half-baked totalitarian education plan, the overall devaluation of Public schools in America - low and decreasing funding and low teacher salaries.
Let's return to full and adequate funding for schools - including healthy free lunches for kids that need them, adequate time outside for kids through 8th grade, adequate funding for the arts and music, adequate funding for science labs, support for public schools in low income areas (washer/dryers, showers, tutoring, after school programs), universal pre-K! and finally let's all treat teaching as the valued profession that it is.
365
@Michelle E Please don't forget fully funded library/media center programs manned by qualified library media specialists.
20
@Michelle E
"Without education, we are in a horrible and deadly danger of taking educated people seriously."
- G.K. Chesterton
4
Not surprising! I’m a college prof- the students we worry about in my dept. are the ones who cannot relate or communicate with others. They don’t get internships and employers pass over them for more personable grads. A real Classroom is not scripted, neither is life.
8
One quick tell is to look at the Literature curriculum. The one I was expected to teach used only public domain works out of copyright--doing it on the cheap.
It included a unit on Ayn Rand's "Anthem", the only sci-fi/fantasy in the whole curriculum--grab 'em while they're young?
Utter drivel.
7
In short, I view this scheme as yet one more way to get rid of teachers. They cost money. Why not funnel all those saved labor dollars over to Zuckerberg and his cronies.
Very very sad. I fear for our children and our future educators.
9
kansas..... what can you say about kansas that has not already been said? sam Brownback, kris kobach, and long before that John brown. I would have preferred that the article focus on other places where the summit system had been accepted / rejected. kansas rejected good education the they let their taxes be cut to the bone.
4
Age old truth is that you can’t make coders out of farmers, no more than you can make farmers out of coders.
2
@EveryDayAmerican - and yet millions of young farmers left to became machinists during the Industrial revolution. If you can balance a checkbook you can learn to code. Furthermore, even farming itself is becoming increasingly dominated by technology and data science. This is an issue of national priorities and our questionable commitment to creating opportunities for young people.
2
@YourEverydayAmerican- irrelevant and untrue.
3
Here in Arizona? Oh boy...my school has laptops for all 6-8 students. Wait, it gets better...there is also a program called "elevate," where students learn science via an online teacher! A person (I dunno if their qualified or not) has to sit in the room and supervise only! My guess if that goes well, instead of hiring a real teacher (hard to do in Arizona, as all you need is a pulse to teach; I have my formal training) they will go toward this concept.
Wait there's more! Our district sold their soul to Google. I mean it's Google docs this, Google classroom that.
It's where we are at in America. Sad.
4
"Unlock the power within".."presonalized learning"..."frees up time for teachers to do what they do best..mentoring students".."educational moonshots..astronauts"..
Then finally in a direct slap to the face of those that support 'conventional' methodologies..this, "..protests are largely about nostalgia".
You know what..we have been toying with these experiments in changing our instructional methods now for, well..for along long time..we have Montessori'd..we have tried academic selectivity (potentiality)..we've chartered and home schooled (might not belong on this list)..what we evidently refuse to do is the one tried and true answer....
HIRE MORE QUALIFIED TEACHERS ..AND PAY THEM MORE
8
Several points:
I read books, not e-books. I have not been able to get used to reading a book from a computer screen. However, I have used a computer to learn many things. There are clear advantages to use a computer over a book for teaching.
The article mentions anecdotic and not real data about the success of the program. We need to know whether the program is working or not and see actual data.
There is no description of the program, but apparently, it requires children to spend most, if not all, their time in front of the computer. I need to know and understand how the program works to see whether the parents revolting are right and the program doesn't work.
It seems a good initiative but it may be badly implemented, who knows. Furthermore, the development and maintenance of the software should be done completely apart and independently of any Facebook involvement at all.
2
@Gonzalo- if you read the comments, you'll find many by highly trained educators who will quote research and also present field and case studies. I can give you my impressions of almost 40 years in the field. And it's not good, but one of the reasons you won't read about it is that Zuckerberg and other tech giants know the results are against entirely computer-based educational programs. That's why he doesn't want Summit to be evaluated by the Harvard study, as quoted in the article. The results will not be good for sales.
Good for the rebelling students and parents. Ask the kids at every public school here in “flyover country”: from stupid games in elementary school computer lab, through “inverted classrooms” in middle school and high school science, through fully online classes in college, I have never heard anyone say they’ve learned much of anything that way. Teachers never criticize the curricula they are commanded to teach —no point interviewing them.
Check Isaac Asimov sci-fi short story "The Fun They Had" (1951)
This sounds a bit like mass hysteria fueled by the necessity to "change." And parents are notorious for wanting what they want whether it's state of the art sports facilities and taj mahal schools or study practices that are from their own generation. No wonder the Chinese and the Germans and Indians are smarter.
8
This crisis is symptomatic of our irresponsible obsession with technology, of our simplistic sense that new technology is necessarily where we will find the solution to our previous failings. We continually abdicate our what is own responsibility to the latest technological products. To imagine that the likes of Zuckerberg are in any way interested in the well-being and education of our children is gnostic delusion.
2
I think kids already spend way too much time on I-pads and away from books,, even comic books would be an improvement to the mindless moving blocks around the screen -- Mario Brothers but worse... and then they sit down to watch something on the telly! And then they get yelled at for eating too much or eating candy.
68
Very strange that instead of explaining what the Summit program does, it just presented complaints about it. What makes it so terrible?
8
What are the actual issues with the platform? This article just seems to highlight that folks don't like it, but doesn't seem to point out objective issues with it.
For all I know, Summit is just fine, and these are just folks afraid of change. I mean, their schools definitely weren't fine the way they were before.
I just feel uninformed now about something potentially important.
8
Did you read the article? How about that it all but eliminates student-teacher interaction, includes links to Daily Mail articles as part of its curriculum, and makes students physically ill from staring at a screen for 8 hours a day?
4
@Jack: Stephen is correct. The article does not cover the curriculum and methods of Summit in any meaningful way.
The idea that it "eliminates student-teacher interaction" is a good case in point. I went to good, public schools. My child goes to a Summit school. That school offers extraordinarily more teacher-student interaction than the traditional model.
5
Granted, McPherson parents and students who may like the Summit program are in the minority but why are their voices not heard here? It might be instructive to hear from students who like the program. Why not talk with some of the "vast majority" of Wellington parents/students who are allegedly happy with the program?
Summit might do better to set up closed tracks for its program in traditional schools. Open the self-learning track to students and parents who embrace the concept. Build out from there, if it is still successful.
Zuckerberg and Chan, when it comes to progressive ideas, we're not in Kansas anymore.
3
For thousands of years, students were taught by teachers with no more technology than a chalkboard, and those students went on to understand the origins of the universe, land people on the moon, split atoms, discover and decode our DNA, and build the very devices and software that made Zuckerberg a billionaire. And now we are allowing this college dropout to conduct experiments on our children that upend the processes that have created these outcomes. What could go wrong?
What will it take to teach Silicon Valley that their successes in creating popular apps are not even remotely related to the great achievements of mankind, and not indicative of anything other than luck and a small amount of technical skill? Perhaps a generation of irreversibly poorly educated students will suffice?
12
To be fair, these programs are being marketed to perpetually underperforming schools in areas of the country where the traditional teacher-pupil model is not working. eLearning has a place in modern education, particularly for students who have academic deficiencies that only become more pronounced as they matriculate through the system. But these tools should serve as a supplement, not replacement, to the traditional model.
2
@WL- your description is not quite apt. What you're really talking about are a set of schools where the budgets have been gutted by state-level politics and they no longer have any money to pay teachers. The "teacher-pupil model" works just fine as it always has, but these rural schools can't afford it.
So Zuckerberg saves the day with a "free" educational program he's been trying to sell for a while, that allows him to gather more information on these students than ever, and for a lifetime. And he offers no research to show it will even work in the way it is being applied here, and refused to let it be a part of a Harvard study because, well, we don't really know why. Would the results be bad for sales? Anyone who even expresses any misgivings is patronized and criticized as a Luddite.
And you're not skeptical?
1
Montessori education has had personalized hands on curriculum for decades. Yes, Summit is the problem. So many problems with the overuse of technology and screen time. The last thing these kids need is more of it.
5
As a college professor, I see the advantages and disadvantages of online learning. If online courses are taught by knowledgeable, dedicated professors, learning can still take place. But too often online education reminds me of the “emperor wearing clothes” folktale. Everyone stands to gain because the college makes more money, many teachers perceive they can work fewer hours, and many students perceive the courses to be easier. So who is going to complain?But as one professor told me, after teaching his first online course, “It went well, but don’t let anyone tell you it’s really teaching.”
5
Socialization not social media is needed to be taught in schools. Books can teach reading writing arithmetic at a students unique pace at a fraction of the cost and with no error messages.
3
@sues The article states correctly that the Summit teaching materials are free and self paced.
"The system is free to schools."
In addition to the online materials being far less expensive than books, the font style, size, and color can be adjusted to meet the needs of children with various vision problems. Books are not so forgiving.
@Biji Bas Nothing in this world is free. Somebody at some level is paying for the software and the software maintenance. The hardware and hardware maintenance has an cost.
1
@sues: Yes, there is no free lunch as they say. However, an economists friend of mine point out, "There is that lunch somebody else pays for".'
The non-profit foundation is paying the costs.. However, from the school system perspective, it is indeed free and a much better model than expensive books.
One of the complaints my son had about his medical school training (less than ten years ago) was the amount of time he had to spend reading material on computers rather than than interacting with other people, on any basis. He said it was a very lonely time for him. And another of his complaints as a practicing physician in a hospital is the amount of time he has to spend tap-tapping away on a computer to "fill the medical record." Sad commentary on educating students or doing your job in a profession that has to deal with people in order to heal them. Students are isolated enough these days glued to their phones and devices. Let's not bring them into the classroom more than we have to. You learn by doing not by reading about how to do and that includes thinking and expressing yourself.
9
Computers feeding “data” to other “computers”. I think the Zuckerbergs of the world have no concept of how humans think, feel and learn. May work well to advance political indoctrination.
1
I have far more questions after reading this article than answers. MZ assigned programmers to develop summit? Were certified instructional designers involved? Software can be very helpful in some fields. (Think math practice) and totally useless in others (think literature where interpretation and synthesis are needed). A large part of education is socialization- learning to listen respectfully to others ideas, collaborating on problem solving, and functioning in a multicultural world. No student benefits from sitting front of a computer screen all day. The noted problems - triggering of epileptic seizures, eye strain, headaches, wrist pain are all known problems too much time at a computer - and indicate to me that Summit is poorly designed.
7
Learning means discussing and getting out of your seat and comparing your answers to your elbow partner's and asking your teacher questions and being put on the spot to answers theirs. It means watching a science demonstration or acting out a play or pretending you're at a witch trial in colonial Salem. Or going for a hike to watch squirrels scamper up a tree. This requires paying real human beings who are educated and curious and energetic enough to do this with kids. The villain isn't Zuckerberg but dollar pinching administrators -- and I wouldn't let off the hook the "differentiated education" crowd who go around saying they're "visual learners". Who isn't. Ultimately, there's only one way to learn-- the hard way. There aren't shortcuts.
5
When I was studying for my degree in Online Teaching and Instructional Design in 2015, the biggest dilemma discussed was how to bridge the "digital divide" that not only separates low-income families from technology but also separates generations of educators and parents from the knowledge--and "buy-in"--they need to use technology in the classroom effectively. The rollout of Summit Education in Kansas is a clear example of this. To simply plunk 300 middle school kids in front of laptops in a brick-and-mortar school and have them "self-direct their education" is NOT how online teaching works. We cannot expect teachers to just sit through a 10-hour professional development course and truly understand how to combine online resources with face-to-face teaching. And we cannot take face-to-face instruction out of the equation, either--whether it's teacher-led or student-led group work, it still has immeasurable value both intellectually and socially. The quizzes, lesson plans, videos, and exercises within Summit Learning (or any other online educational curriculum) should be used as tools in tandem with teacher-led instruction, not replace it, especially in grades Pre-K through 8. Even Maria Montessori insisted that her methodology would only work when a Montessori-trained teacher facilitated it.
9
The "cutting edge of what's next" sounds like a big reduction in the number of actual teachers, replaced by lower wage and no benefits "counselors" or "mentors," all beholden to some curriculum controlled by a corporation totally unresponsive to local concerns and realities. Locally elected school boards lose influence. But give everyone a new Chromebook as part of the deal, and voila! we become more polarized.
11
How do students learn to write and express sustained logical arguments on a computer? How does a computer judge a truly innovative student response which transcends the programmed options? Can it distinguish stupidity from brilliance? What students are served by the computer is choice among the options that are programmed into the system? Can the computer do field trips and individual observation? How long will it take the tech salesmen to understand that the most important role of the teacher is individualized feed-back? How can a teacher provide individualized feedback if each student works alone on some program that the teacher cannot follow?
Many of the worst trends in education in the past were pushed by business interests or by foundations run by people who were not content with showing us they were richer, they also were eager to show us that they were smarter. To paraphrase Ronald Reagan, the most feared words in America may well become: I come from big business, and I'm here to help.
11
There cannot be progress without change but there can change without progress. This looks like the latter. I would pull my kid out of such schools also.
6
What if you went to school and were told: "Click on this stuff and then take a test."
I have two doctoral-level degrees, and I know that without an engaged heart, there is no lasting learning. For most students true life-long learning is a byproduct of mostly social interactions in schools: student-teacher, and student-student interactions. For most people, this does not happen when you click on stuff----it takes an unusual and mature person to engage their heart on the basis of intellectual content. Even medical students are like this, and children especially so.
If you wanted to tell our children that they are not worth our time, I cannot imagine a more effective way than saying: "Click on this stuff and then take a test". Ghastly.
9
@Scott That would be ghastly. Fortunately, it is not even remotely the way Summit Schools work. They offer more teacher-child interaction than the traditional model.
By the way, I am an IT professional, and thus continuously engaged in life-long learning. Nearly all the educational content used in my field is from on line presentations and white papers. The net is vital to my work and serves us well educationally.
2
@Biji Basi- I come a from a field where all the things I've been taught, and teach, and still learn, come entirely from books and hands-on, one-on-one teaching from a master to a pupil. They cannot be learned any other way. Those that try end up never mastering these skills sufficient to do them at a professional level, or even with basic competence.
I've seen such ed products come and go these last 40 years, and they never produce the vaunted results with young students, and/or when used exclusively.
Does anyone really believe that screens & "self-directed learning" can accomplish what real teachers do? Or do they pretend to believe it because it's profitable, or ideologically correct, for them?
4
@Martin Nobody believes that, and that is not a part of the concept at all. The concept is that teachers can serve better as one on one mentors than as lecturers.
So the lecture part is on screen (often in the form of multi-media presentations) and the children receive more personal help from teachers than in the traditional model.
Basically most of the criticisms of Summit in this list are from theory land, from a basis of zero experience. Those of us who have had our children in the program for a number of years have a totally different point of view.
4
Underfunded public goods should not be testing grounds for private profit. Allowing Silicone Valley to offer software that supplements teachers is dangerously delivering information to students: it says here is your access to the world as it is, as opposed to a classroom that teaches them how we discovered the realities of math and science, and the always-complicated history of colonization and globalization. The teachers stopped writing tests and quizzes and are now mentors to laptops that teach- that is not a formula for building a generation that creates and codes tech.
5
I have very strong feelings about technology in classrooms. First, I am no luddite. I confidently and effectively use technology for planning and implementing lessons in my classroom. I use technology for most of my professional business, from communicating with students and parents, to creating online quizzes. However, in my 20 years in the classroom, I have seen a decline in students who are able to communicate well with each other, as well as a decline in their speaking confidence. I'm no researcher, but my anecdotal experience points to the rise in screen use in all areas of students' live as the main culprit for the problems.
Here is a small list of what I see happening in my classroom. (My district has one-to-one Chromebooks for the students.)
One, online lessons and work encourage cheating. We have seen a rise in plagiarism at my school.
Two, when students are online, it is easy for them to browse inappropriate sites (not connected to the learning task); the forces teachers to become mere babysitters.
Three, it keeps them from interacting with one another.
Four, it is bad for their posture and vision.
This is not to say technology can't be used an effective tool in the classroom: mini and long term research; collaboration online; powerful multi-modal compositions are some of the powerful ways technology can be used in schools. They should not sideline the teachers role. Thank you.
12
Sounds like the problem is with the poorly designed curriculum and a terrible interface that takes students to daily mail and conversion sites.
4
First Bill Gates "convinced" (read philanthropic dollars) state and federal policy people to adopt Microsoft's "high stakes testing" in schools, then they dropped it at Microsoft. Turns out it was terrible. While Microsoft left it in the dust schools were stuck with it.
Now Zuckerberg.
The act of giving money should not automatically allow these people a seat at the table. They are not qualified for this. They should have no say in how educators go about their business.
12
To be fair, Kids have different learning style. Many aren’t given the tools to understand how tenacious and creative the process need to be to first retain some thread, connections then need to be made outside the learning environment. To say one size fits all whether teacher or software is narrow perspective. To listen to parents and students anecdotes is narrow perspectives. Lots of students are highly self guided and once given a task sets out to go through it, lots also refuse tasks given for some psychological blockage or lack of family practice. I think learning habits begins at home and both study with teacher and computer programs can be balanced useful tools in a setting but not one in exclusion to the other. On a tangent, it’s ridiculous that kids are given award for doing à homework or needs end of the day lottery reward to make them interested. The carrot is the fun of learning, if you don’t have that both teacher and software are failures. The country has seen challenges with the teaching environment but also has seen equally bright students go on in their education and entering the work force.
The people of Kansas wanted supply side capitalism. Now, they're getting it -- good and hard.
9
This is another exposé on the ill effects of high tech on youth which brings out the inner Luddite in me.
I have nothing but nostalgia for the early 1990s : the last stress-free time period in our lifetime when folks were content with WAITING when ordering a book or catching up with friends and family via their answering machine. The Summit programme is simply another sign of modern life out of balance, 'efficiency' foisted upon defenceless minors who are subjected to alienation and unnecessary physiological strain as well.
6
Nothing is ever “free”. There will be hidden costs down the road. I remember how wonderful FREE ATMs were when introduced. Now each transaction can have multiple charges and ATMs lead to the elimination of thousands of bank teller positions.
Is that really what we want with education?
6
Perfect example of Trump supporters and education. THEY want a free pass for their kids and believe education is overrated. “Somehow, they think being an American is enough”.
5
Time to watch "The Matrix" again. This urge to consolidate, digitize and evaluate learning as an "outcome" based activity will end badly for all of us. No one knows what the world will look like in 50 years. Education should be about community, creativity, culture, ethics - and, yes - the skills needed to communicate, innovate and respond to changing circumstances. The internet for all its wonderful offerings is also a large vending machine. Education is not about vending. It is about encouraging humans to accept the world's diversity, know about the past and find the courage to contribute towards the unending challenges we face today and in the future. "Free" is never free.
5
If a teacher engages with a student 10 min a week and has, say 30 students, that takes about 5 hours, what do they do for the other 35 hours?
2
@TED338
30 students? That's a tutor, not a teacher. Try four or five hours of 30 students an hour.
1
The approach described sounds flawed from the beginning. I have heard success stories from educators who have done the reverse: Online lectures are give as a homework assignment followed by teacher- student interaction problem solving, writing, etc. the following day. Perhaps they’ll try this approach before giving up entirely.
2
As a retired educator, I would ask what are the long term effects of exposing young children to the screen light that drives sleep/ wake cycles. Are there disruptions in nerve transmissions?
5
I'm terrified that, having failed to establish a database in the US, Silicon Valley will now export its experiment in online "education" to some developing nation, where it will meet with less resistance and cause even more long-term damage.
4
Would very much like to know what curriculum Mr. Zuckerberg’s child uses at school. It’s my understanding that most tech leaders keep their own children far away from screens. They know how bad they are for children!
17
@Ruthy Kohorn Rosenberg. You’re not kidding. The NYT reported on this very question not long ago:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/style/digital-divide-screens-schools.amp.html
1
My feeling is that computer should augment good instructors and that teachers should be required to be fluent in computer usage. I have to admit that I am an old school computerist with a bias to getting all the info that only a computer can in fractions of a second but there is no doubt a need for highly competent teacher to guide study.
Teaching mainly by computers, led by for profit companies, will be nothing but money making boondoggles for rich folks. Heartless Betsy Devos is a poster child for how bad that can be. The GOP is taking the US public for a really bad ride. The lying school administrators know who sign their paychecks so they do a Sarah Saunders act with the truth to the public, lie totally except when they are under oath & can go to jail for lying.
Ultimately, Parents are going to have to be very active in their children's education; education is for everybody. Study with your kids and find out for yourself if it works. If it doesn't, get rid of it, demand that.
26
Looks like they didn’t acknowledge that everyone has varied interests and learning styles. People learn better from people. When you devalue education and teachers, simply for political calculations you need to own up, you caused this.
47
The concept of student led learning is one that the late educator John Holt espoused when he wrote the book “Teach Your Own.” That is what we did as homeschooling parents. It sounds like this concept has been perverted however with students spending their entire days online. Student led learning the way we interpreted it called for much interaction between students and mentors as well as real life experiences and real books.
14
The problem is that Zuckerberg has absolutely no experience in public education. That type of computer educational program would best be used in moderation and at discretion of the teacher and not as a total platform in every subject in every class and for every student. I can see that students get burnt out on staring at computer screens all day and the school district should haven’t been so bamboozled by Zuckerberg to be the guinea pig for his experiment to try to make even more profits. Sorry, but Facebook is already in your FACE daily and doesn’t need to be in the classroom too.
39
The resounding message from Silicon Valley (particularly Facebook & company) is: "We know what's good for you. We know what you want. We can make these choices for you. And, if you're against us, then you're against societal progress." They're deaf to the outcry, because they know they can get away with murder. Education for large-scale profit will never work. Truly personalized education is only possible person-to-person. Summit may work for a select population, but certainly not for everyone.
In this particular case, I find myself asking why we can't simply invest all of this time and money into school teachers - real people, who deserve full salaries and proper training and whom we need more of in our schools.
Perhaps, to the tech giants who now maintain our windows to reality, our humanity is simply too much of a liability.
58
I was from a hard, cold family. If not for my teachers, I would have been lost. They taught me that human beings could care for me, and I for them. I found a world worth living in through my schools. If I had been consigned to a computer screen and ten minutes with a teacher a day, I would have been lost. My story is far from unique. It does "take a village," not a screen with little plug-in kids attached. No. Just no.
151
Reminds me of the faith some had in Chris Wittle’s Channel One morning news cast in school. Don’t have them read, just watch tv. Not so brilliant.
I’ve heard Zuckerberg’s wife talk about this latest project. She spoke for 25 minutes in current buzz words and you had no idea what the “idea” was except it was on a computer.
32
Ironically, the GOP killed school funding in Kansas, thus leading to this online program, but most of these people complaining probably voted GOP.
75
I heard those words: “Self directed learning”...what could possibly go wrong?!
The very same people writing these programs are the ones who design systems to monitor and capitalize on our social interactions. That’s a massive red flag!
Where’s our education secretary and president regarding this issue? You guessed it, they too never stood behind a plow or got their hands dirty performing an oil change on a tractor!
The first thing these social network types should be demanding is that students learn how to use a pencil! They should learn the beauty of self directed learning via the art of cursive writing, not block letters designed to relieve the soul of its creativity!
Many of our advisories are better at computers than us as a whole...but they have to seriously compartmentalize and control their people to do it. They throw culture out the window to achieve efficiency and what does it get them?...
Drudgery!
9
The story leaves too many unanswered questions and too few facts. It's interesting but underreported. If space was the problem, think graphs??
5
Facebook eh? Does anyone not think that Facebook is essentially using these kids as lab rats to trial software that one day may be worth a ton of money? It’s funny. If a university researcher wants to even do a one time paid survey .. a survey! ... on something even as basic as their TV show preferences, with adult volunteer human “subjects”, they have to jump through all kinds of hoops to get permission - through what’s called an IRB committee. Here kids are involuntarily giving a for profit company free personally identifiable information about how their brain works over a period of years!
33
Per pupil spending for public schools in Kansas, like many education outcome metrics, is approximately at the national mean.
2
Will Summit will assign Issac Asimov's story, The Fun They Had, in which kids long for the time when school meant human teachers, books, and social interaction, not a computerized teacher?
21
1. How much money is changing hands in these promotions both with contributions ot schools/school officials and to teacher "influencers" who paid to promote their happiness with it?
The times write an expose of those scams within the past couple of years.
2. It sounds like there is zero research on these programs, at least research that's not bought and paid for, but
3. This is all part of the rush not only to privatize but also to commodify everything, including our children.
4. And it lowers the need for, and salaries of, teachers, I'm sure.
14
The goal is not to teach: it is to sell computers and ad space. Go home, Mark.
25
I took a few online courses in colleges and was BORED to death.
12
I would be shocked of the children of the Summit millionaires use anything like this software in their schools.
19
To the Mark Zuckerbergs of this world, there is no situation to which they wouldn't say "add more screen time". That is his entire existence and being the tool that makes him and wife more wealthy, his one hammer that makes every problem look like a nail. Besides, kids reading books, learning together by listening to the teacher or discussing problems as a group - what good is that? If they're not looking at a screen, it doesn't make him any money. Listen to the students and parents and rip this junk out. Don't listen to the blinded admin types, they have a vested interest in defending their bad decision.
21
This mind-numbing screen learning will prepare the students to be the perfect consumers for Fox News, the McConnell GOP, and political and corporate advertisers: passively taking in the information without questioning. The students will not experience the excitement and intellectual rigor of batting ideas around the classroom and arguing different points of view, with a teacher playing devil's advocate when necessary. Critical thinking will be lost and the marketplace of ideas will be just a marketplace.
33
The know better arrogance of Summit Learning and the school administrators is breathtaking . Nearly 80% of parents say they would prefer their children not to be in the program and the administrators say "Change rarely comes without some bumps in the road." and "the majority of our parents are happy with the program." Really? Just throw these people out now.
16
Summit doesn’t provide education. Summit simply programs students. It’s heartening to know so many students recognize the reality that Summit’s goal is to turn out unquestioning and compliant worker bees geared to seamlessly transit into workforce placement where their sole reason for existence would be producing increased profits for their overlords.
19
I do not have enough information to form an opinion on this situation, I cannot fathom children having minimum interaction with their teachers and their fellow classmates. I do believe that some computer learning, especially rote memorization can be made fun and as in a game, you can become eager to get better.
For example I study French on Duolingo for free. I look forward to doing it everyday. It never bings if you make a mistake, but trumpets for every correct answer. Also if you don’t understand some quirk, you can go on the discussion blog, where more experienced learners or native born post their explanations. Also another website, Memrise.com is great for short fast paced learning using phrases and new vocabulary and reinforcing through native French speakers on video.
So I can see there could be a place for some of this type of learning, but not at the loss of interaction with the teacher(s) and other students.
13
No no no no no. Human interaction is an important part of the human experience. Tying children's attention to computers is quite inhumane. Nothing can replace eye contact and group discussion. And those day-dreaming moments are important. It's crucial to give individuals the space to dream, to look out of the classroom window, to let the mind wander, to have the chance to imagine and to not be teethered to robotically paced directives every second while sitting in a chair staring at a vibrating screen. How do you feel sitting at a computer? Relaxed? Open? Calm? Not so much. And you'll get no Einstein's from this insane program either. (I'm a retired public school teacher.)
23
Another example of zuckerberg sticking his nose where it does not belong. Just why does summit need to track these children for years? If zuckerberg is involved people should realize he wants the data on your child.
Most importantly this type of learning eliminates the value of in class discussion and interpersonal development. Children do not need more screen time but less. They need to talk to each other, learn to present their thoughts orally in a clear manner, and they need to learn how to get along in the world. This type of learning fails to do any of this.
19
Personalized learning is a wonderful thing, but don’t be fooled. You don’t need a computer program to accomplish that.
19
The #1 determining factor as to where a student is going to succeed in public education is
Socio-Economic
Educators today have a very good idea of how learning takes place, but cannot translate those ideas into bigger outcomes when it comes to low-income minority students.
How to teach the poor; how to elevate the socio-economic status of families?
In California, every other day school districts are promoting the newest and latest and greatest new idea in lesson delivery and disciple policies, people are given Ed Admin degrees and allowed to lead schools and give direction to what pedagogy will be the one in vogue. Nothing to do with there ability to teach, nothing to do with whether they were capable teachers, nothing to do with success in their personal experience as teachers.
Now of course if you are a billionaire you now can believe you have a God-given ability that you can carry over to whatever else needs your superior attention.
What is the key to learning and effective teaching?
MOTIVATION
If you can bottle it, sell it now!!!!
8
How many of their non-school hours do these students spending looking at screens, interacting through screens, promoting idealized versions of themselves through screens... Maybe adding in the extra screen time in class caused them to reach the tipping point. All of the bhaviours mentioned in the article are symptomatic of computer additiction and overuse.
5
Assuming a 5 hour day 5 days a week, a teacher could schedule 150 ten minute sessions per week. How come a teacher then can't manage a 10 minute session once a week? What else is taking up their time?
@herne
Their time is probably spent on paperwor I and filling out useless reports.
From 1993 to 1996 Utah State University’s Instructional Technology Dept had a $750k US Dept of Education grant to develop Computer Interactional Instructional Design (El CID) software where, for instance, 4th graders studying Rocks & Minerals had a multilingual interactive instructional video of a geology professor and his 9 year old grandson walked along a stream, panned for gold, traced it up a stream to an old mine, sampled the vein, and discussed in detail its extraction, uses, affects on early banking, etc.
It was meant to be an exemplar lesson of how a geologist looks and thinks about a metal, a rock, . . .
Now for what was most important important:
The 4th grade class in teams of 3 or 4 used that icon (or text code) software to look at iron, silver, copper, . . .
And they developed their own lessons on various Utah rocks and minerals. They saw and critiqued each team’s design. But the real learning was deciding how best to teach it. Discussion was much of the creation of each team’s work.
The whole idea was to learn how to look and study and share the essentials of science.
5th grade did the same with Utah Plants and Animals. A zoologist and a botanist with their children or grandchildren each used CID. Then the student teams designed for a different animal or plant.
A friend discovered that his 5 year old had hacked into his system over weeks, 2-5 am, and made a sophisticated lesson.
The students could choose to give 3 or more or less exemplar examples, . .
2
I was torn when I read this article. As a homeschooler who tries to limit my kids' use of devices, a full-time computer-based educational scenario doesn't sound like something I would want at all. But then I thought back to my own high school experience and how bad some of my classes and teachers were, and if I had had the choice to do a computer-based track where I could pursue my own education, I probably would have taken it. It doesn't seem right that a school district should force this upon students, but perhaps they could be given the choice to either participate in the computer-led learning or a traditional classroom.
10
I haven’t waded through all of the reader posts, but it seems like what both the article and the reader posts I read are missing is the possibility of a middle ground. Administrators constantly pressure teachers to “differentiate” learning in a manner that — quite frankly— is meant to accommodate struggling learners. It seems like a few, judiciously employed personalized learning platforms could be used for remediation and learning gap mitigation. You don’t have to replace all the teachers with AI.
5
My nephew went to a small private performing arts school. Classes are very small. In the morning kids practice performing arts, and in the afternoons they do Internet based coursework with the assistance of teachers.
My nephew graduated, and he's still living. It's a regular amazement.
If using a computer causes more epileptic seizures and eyestrain in children than adults, can you please explain to us exactly how. It isn't explained in here anywhere and I'm not convinced.
As for social skills, I spent 13 years in a K through 12 school where teachers lectured us and the other kids bullied me, and I didn't learn much in the way of social skills. I'm not getting how traditional classroom learning builds social skills. As far as I can see, it doesn't. You sit still all day and listen to teachers, and you march down halls.
As far as learning, I've usually learned best on my own, whether the subject matter was hard, as in math and science, or easy as in literature and history. I find it best to proceed at my own pace and work through difficult concepts. When lectured at I just fell asleep!
As an adult I do a considerable amount of online learning, supplemented by book reading, and I love it.
11
In reading the comments, it appears that authors are nostalgic about all the Mr. Chips they all remember in the classroom rather than the reality of teachers consumed with classroom discipline, inattentive and bored students and dull, safe curricula. If implemented correctly, Summit could be an exciting educational venture--especially at a time when most children get their information and education from the internet. And let's remember, the education delivery that appalls the writers is the staple of the fastest growing area of education: HOME SCHOOLING.
6
@Olive, try reading the comments instead of bringing forth a canned sneer. Listen to what these people are actually saying.
13
There was an article in The Atlantic Magazine recently about cell phones posing the question, "have we lost a generation" because of the device?
What I concluded was that with all the positives associated with mobile phone usage, it is the separation of the individual from the shared experiences of the group which previous generations have known that can be most alarming. Virtual friends are no substitute at times of stress for an actual living and breathing best friend.
We had language labs in college, but only in support of the shared exercise of learning a classroom presented. I can't imagine trying to fathom something like the Cuban Missile Crisis as it was happening just me and my laptop, perhaps frantically texting or tweeting while being expected to understand real from imagined, let alone discerning the difference between rumor and reality.
Trigger warnings. Cultural appropriation. No wonder we increasingly are being faced with a generation of absolutists with no patience for anything that does not conform to their particular view of a world they have little or no "hands on" knowledge of experiencing?
11
When I look back on my 20 years of schooling, the classes that I remember best are the ones that were taught by human beings I admired. Those passionate. dedicated teachers informed many of the choices I made in life. They inspired and encouraged me, and their spirit and intellect changed me for the better.
When I think of what it might have been like to have instead spent many those hours in front of a screen, my eyes hurt and my head aches.
23
A "personalized learning platform" from Mark Zuckerberg, what could possibly go wrong? Why would any school district trust Zuckerberg with such a lofty goal as education? He developed FB not by bringing in the best sociologists, psychiatrists, philosophers, and cultural anthropologists, but rather by focusing obsessively on monetization and global domination. A bunch of software engineers deciding how we should communicate. The rot of FB should have been enough to send the school board running.
18
I agree completely.
5
“We’re out in the middle of nowhere, he said. “So we’re the guinea pigs.”
The districts in flyover states chose Summit. No one twisted their arms. Their elected leaders are bleeding dry public school districts and government in general. So of course they picked a pig in a poke over proper staffing and decent wages and benefits. One is bewildered that these folks cannot see that they are responsible for their own bad decisions. Don't blame Zuckerberg--you did this to yourselves and to your kids. For lower taxes of a dollar or two.
10
@patroklos
The faith some put in a computer screen over a printed page is astonishing to me.
5
This sort of situation is completely predictable. Rural communities tend to reach and push back from new technology or new ways of approaching problems. I suspect if this initiative was supported by a megachurch or faith based NGO, this problem would welcomed with open arms. We see this problem not just in rural America but also rural Pakistan or other developing countries.
3
What about the Silicon Valley folks are testing their new gadgets on their own children first before they are trying to use the kids of less well off families as lab rats. Seems to me that would be the correct way to move forward with those online learning tools.
489
But they know better and do better for their own.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/style/phones-children-silicon-valley.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share
40
@Mr. Chocolate The head of Summit, Diane Tavenner, sends her teenage son to a Summit Learning school and has for years. How about checking your facts before getting all outraged?
9
Then give us these "facts," Ali, and one person's son is not the "facts" about any of the tech bosses but one.
54
Bright lights like Chan/Zuckerberg, Gates, Jobs, et al, have more money than sense and think they know more than professionals in fields they have know nothing about. When I was on a school board, near Silicon Valley, 25 years ago, the new Superintendent proposed transitioning to computer-based learning. I reminded him that meaningful learning and mentoring are personal experiences with emotional and social components. The plan was scaled way back, to simply introducing laptops for some research projects. Computers are tools, useful in many ways. I'm using one right now. They're not teachers and my IT-professional friends almost all limit their children's engagement with screens in their free time as well as their school time.
14
What kind of school do Zuckerberg's kids attend? Dollars to donuts they're NOT staring at screens all day. Didn't the NYT report recently that the consensus among parents in Silicon Valley was to have their kids go low-tech? The hypocrisy is breathtaking.
21
As a teacher who uses the Summit platform in Wisconsin, I find the article disheartening. My students don’t spend the majority of their day on the computer. My colleagues and my students have heard all the noise about Summit and reject its fear-based claims. Our results speak for themselves. Our test scores are up and our students are engaged.
We’ve found that those who are looking for a “traditional” classroom are the same who fought the Common Core. They’re focused on fear and that fear has resulted in demonizing this tool that is empowering my students with the knowledge and the skills they need to succeed today and tomorrow. The projects and homework are rigorous. Best of all the platform helps to hold my students accountable. They understand what they know and what they need to learn.
What we should fear is that American students aren’t competing with those in Europe and Asia. That data is indisputable. That’s what needs to change. Summit is a tool that allows my students to meet that challenge.
11
Kamala Harris' proposal to raise teacher pay with federal dollars is all the more striking given problems fixing our education with the very best of technology.
Silicon Valley -- in this case, Zuckerberg at al. -- are merely seeking in education a new way monetizing their technology. They need to stay out of the way of human, face-to-face teaching.
9
ACE (Accelerated Christian Education) schools have been using a similar model for decades. Students work through modules on their own, at their own pace. I was unfortunate enough to attend an ACE school in 1978 while living in the U.S. As a student I had always learnt best in group settings so really struggled. My older sister however excelled with this type of learning, plowing through 2 grades in one year. I recall though, several grade 12 students formally graduating from high school despite not even having completed primary school level course work!!
In 1978 of course PCs and the internet were not yet a reality though, so screen time was not an issue. I can well understand why this model of learning would not suit many students though. Perhaps if educational funding remains low, a combination of this model and the traditional classroom setting could work.
1
The research on online learning is a mixed bag---and, what we do know is that from a technological standpoint, technology has the power to monitor closely patterns of mistakes made by learners and then, adjusting instruction to align with recognized patterns...Now, having said that, learning is one part knowledge and skills and four parts emotion--that is where teachers come in---Having taught for many years, and admitting I was not perfect, only a human being in front of a class get light the fire of interests and engagement. Granted, each period, I did not light the fire, but, I did do it more times than whatever Mark Zuckerberg could come up with
5
Self-directed learning should involve play-time, free-time, creative-time, communication-time, human interaction-time, discovery-time in the real world over hours and hours of screen-time.
8
There is a line in the article that is clearly causing some misunderstanding of the actual situation:
“The platform that Summit provides was developed by Facebook engineers”
The “platform” is the logins, net working, tracking , underlying menu and navigation technology. The curriculum is developed by educators, not Facebook engineers.
10
Education is teaching young people how to solve problems as members of a social group. Computer education is nuttiness taken to the extreme.
8
Zuckerberg, fear, funding cuts, corporate speak, train smash.
Again.
It's becoming hard to peruse the front page of a national newspaper and not see the influence and disasters of Mr. Zuckerberg's 'help.'
Perhaps he bought the Ring of Mordor to rule them all...
1
We all know where this is going. At first the software will be to 'enhance' learning and then it will replace teachers altogether. If you work in a large corporation you have seen this with HR paperwork (benefits, etc.). At first, you'd have an HR rep available to help or walk you through a course. Now, it's all via the software (and almost zero interaction with an HR rep)--and we all know how 'enriching' those enhanced powerpoint-type courses are. This is the 'quality' of education we can expect when the ultimate goal is to pay zero in taxes.
14
Here are a few more things.
First, the single biggest power of technology in K-12 education is to enable personalized learning. Without that, you have the old large group instruction that works for the kids in the middle, but the kids who can't maintain the pace are doomed, and the sharpest kids are staring out the window. Personalized learning has always had the potential to fix this, but it's never been practical on a large scale without the enabling software. Note also that personalized learning has a special value for disadvantaged kids, who are the most at risk of falling behind and being doomed.
So products like Summit are not the problem. The problem is how it was implemented here, in a brute force, top-down way. Hundreds of districts have very successfully implemented products like Summit, but they did it in a "top-down/bottom-up" way, maintaining a district-wide and school-wide focus, while working intensely with the teachers to gain their help in designing the solution and helping them to change their teaching practices.
Also, there is a big piece that is oddly missing from this story. This is that this isn't Mr. Zuckerberg's first attempt to finance a top-down reform of a school district. The first was in Newark, NJ, and this story is documented in the excellent 2015 book "The Prize." That effort also ended poorly. Mr. Zuckerberg's heart is in the right place, but education is a complex industry, and you have to do this stuff in the right way.
9
@Jerry Schulz
Totally agree with your comments. Dale Russakof in The Prize documents the inevitable results of the collusion between Zuckerberg, Chris Christie and Cory Booker in the attempt to pursue their financial and political goals on the students, families and teachers of Newark. Zuckerberg donated an obscene amount of money in the attempt to sell tablets and software meant to improve the Newark schools while they were under state control. Somehow most of the money ended up with politically connected consultants and very little ended up in the classroom. Anyone who believes Zuckerberg has an unselfish and philanthropic concern about public schools must be very naive or unaware of Facebook’s role in supporting and enabling corruption and violence.
9
The Ontario government has put into place a mandatory e-learning program starting next year. It has been proven not to work for the majority of students, especially those with IEP 's. It would also be a breach of Ontario educational law not to provide accommodations for those courses...no classroom teacher to be with the students. Students entering grade 9 next year are now required to take an e-learning course every year for the next four years. Do not let it happen there. Courses such as these are cost cutters at best, nothing more. The combination of a solid teacher who combines tech with good teaching practices will always provide better results.
2
The underlying assumption is that technology enhances learning. If that's the case, then there should be theories about learning which support this and point towards reasonable research questions which should be asked.
However, that's not the case. Cognitive scientists know a lot about how humans learn and it doesn't depend upon, nor is it necessarily enhanced by, technology. Our country also has guidance about what learning outcomes we should aim for and how our curriculum should be constructed. As a parent in these districts I would want to know what research designs were used, what questions were asked based upon what theories, what data was collected, how it was analyzed, then how it was interpreted. I would hold Summit's feet to the fire - what evidence do they have for impacts on learning, motivation, persistence, etc.
If the impacts are negative, then you have your answer - this is not a viable option for our students.
5
@Boilerup Mom
Couldn’t agree more. No proof this works.
The good people of Kansas could give up on their Brownback imposed tax fantasy and then go back and fund their basic services.
9
I remembered there was an article that dicussed how Silicon parents are banning their kids from using social media and cell phones. They even got together to ensure all other students are on the same page so their kids won't be singled out. So... this is pretty weird. Also, a classroom of over 20 students, all have an eletronic devices (and they probably have cell phone too), is a lot of EMF radiation going around. Maybe that's why they are getting headace?
5
The New York Times has done some excellent reporting on the growing level of panic of among parents in Silicon Valley regarding the effect that digital devices are having on their own kids, even as Silicon Valley companies try to sell ever more digital devices and related products.
One of a very interesting series of articles in the Times:
The Digital Gap Between Rich and Poor Kids is Not What We Expected
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/26/style/digital-divide-screens-schools.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage
6
Welcome to the new brave world, where everything, including teaching, learning, meetings or even treating patients can supposedly be done remotely or via artificial intelligence.
Newsflash: the human-to-human interaction is still of value!
11
With 1k comments plus and counting I’m sure I’m not adding anything novel but this is maddening. I’m old enough to have seen things come and go and come and go. One thing never changes though and that’s the effectiveness of self-directed learning.
Some people learn by doing, some by seeing, some by listening. All learn in different measures of all three (or in many other ways I expect).
Anyway I go on. Self-directed learning is the blind leading the blind.
4
As someone who has taught pre-k through high school for 25 years, in rural and urban settings, I can tell you that children learn through verbal interactions with others, and through mostly shared hands-on activities. Small children learn to speak, not via television, but by verbally interacting with others. The educational trend for at least two decades, initiated by corporations and instituted by lazy education administrators, has been to monetize and mine the education of our children for all they can get.
In a small rural school, I've seen a combination 1st and 2nd grade class spend all their days staring at computer screens, being constantly assessed. How meaningful can information acquired that way be? What are they really learning? Most importantly, how natural is it for six and seven year olds to sit staring at a screen for hours a day. With the the emphasis on screens, kids' cell phone habits have been legitimized by their schools.
This type of teaching goes hand in hand with the constant testing and assessing of children. I've seen kids in kindergarten pushed to read and write before they are ready, and tested continually. Their teachers are forced to use "educational products". One veteran teacher, referring to the products lamented, "I know how to teach children to read. I don't need these programs."
13
Learning requires live experiences and teacher instruction. Try learning to sail or play the violin without live teacher interactions. Hands on, active learning, not passive computer instruction is what is needed. Schools with teachers are LIFE, it needs to be experienced and learned in the active mode.
Why not have all the football players on the Ohio State and Michigan squads stay home some Saturday in fall and each player "mouse" and "click" their moves, blocks, runs, etc, and have the fans sit on their "screens" watching the robotrons play the game? Really exciting?
As Ben Bernake quipped at his commencement address to the 2013 Princeton graduates. "If your jersey is muddied, you haven't been in the game." Go to real school, learn real life.
6
I am against Mark Zuckerberg Summit program. Although Mr. Zuckerberg may have good intentions, the emphasis on teaching should be my human voice and not a computer. Teachers should be doing the educational instruction not a animated video on a computer screen.
9
I teach Public Speaking and Debate, as well as essay writing to Cambodian students at the high school and university level. My students' speaking, writing and critical thinking skills benefit greatly. How do computers address these essentials?
By the way, some of my students have received scholarships to study in the US. They're ready.
6
“Students are becoming self-directed learners and are demonstrating greater ownership of their learning activities.”
Double talk, nonsense. If children engage in self-directed learning (i.e. not requiring human interaction with other students and a "teacher," then why have teachers or schools at all? Why did they ever come into being?
7
@MKR Our experience with our child in a Summit School is that the teachers are freed from lecturing and spend much more one on one time with the students than the traditional model offers.
By the way, self directed learning is not double talk. It is a liberating and very successful model for education.
2
@Biji Basi All learning is self-directed in some way. But in the human case, it all also other-directed in some way -- i.e. what we mean by culture. I'm sure computer assisted learning can work well with the right students and teacher. Leaving a bunch of kids alone with computers (what I understood the article to describe) won't work.
Learning is messy and social. Efforts to make it efficient and individual only work with a small subset of the student population.
7
I would bet: school systems that have adopted Summit and the like- come next teachers contract negotiation - will argue that the teacher-cum-mentor job is less complex and does not warrant a pay raise. The confluence of technological and budgetary considerations seem to override the actual work processes of education all to often.
413
@Mimette Mentoring is just one aspect of the learning model. During mentoring, teachers help student learn the soft skills many employers seek....goal setting, planning to reach those goals, problem-solving, and understanding how they learn. Teaching is the same, and maybe better now, because teachers can use the data to address specific learning problems students are having. Good teaching is good teaching, with or without the platform. summit emphasizes good teaching. The platform does help my teachers ensure all students get the education they deserve and as not left behind like the traditional model often does. We are in our third year with the platform, and our negotiations do not include or are influenced by the use of the platform.
4
Computers are not at all required for learning in schools. I have been telling it repeatedly for a number of years. Traditional method of teaching is more than sufficient to make children learn all subjects.
Computer basics and programming can be learnt in the college or even at a later stage. It’s completely wrong to force the children to learn with the help of computer and create all sorts of problems at such an early stage.
7
Teachers knit students together into a cohesive functioning society, knowing that the fabric is only as strong as is weakest link. Computer learning unravels the fabric of students and thus society in order to find the individual strongest threads and discard the others on the floor of failure.
5
College grad students have multiple problems with “self-directed” classes!
As a doctor I have YET to meet a child who can learn without specific direction. I speak with parents all the time about supporting a child’s education: quiet atmosphere, corner of a family room, where the computer screen is VISIBLE at all times.
Have parents given up? They now remind me of owners of chihuahuas...they see no need to teach them...just let them be HAPPY!
Tech giants are taking down this country. No child should have a smart phone. Period! Just exactly when are they going to learn to read or write that is NOT Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram?
13
My students re-enacted the American Revolution as a tug of war, re-enacted 4 famous Supreme Court cases, have performed a readers theater of the Lincoln Douglas debates, and analyzed primary sources on the Raid at Harpers’ Ferry. They didn’t use their computers very much. Most of the time they were reading, writing and consulting with other students. One doesn’t need fancy technology to learn and capture a student’s attention. Lesson plans need to be designed by a teacher who knows and enjoys students. We do history TOGETHER because we’re humans not machines.
21
School, whether public or private, is a six hour stretch of time where kids get to socially interact with one another face to face, not screen to screen. I suspect at some level, both students and parents really missed that part of living.
9
This seems to be emerging as a hallmark of the Grey Lady: no data; no attempt to assess with any rigor; some anecdotes; and some counterfactuals but ultimately no argument.
There are no performance assessments of this approach after years of implementation across 100's of schools?
The fact that Summit chose not to go ahead with an academic study is 'suspicious' somehow?
Some parents and their kids don't 'like' this style of education after a few months?
I was hoping for a reasoned and argued discussion contrasting traditional teacher as gatekeeper versus a software-assisted approach.
5
Putting aside the merits of Summit, on which I don't have enough information to make a judgment, it strikes me as a bit odd that kids who are glued to their phones every waking minute would suddenly worry about "screen time" and eyestrain when it comes to using a computer for education.
Really?
8
Like other commenters, it would help if programs like Summit got some systematic analysis in terms of content, delivery, and results. This article is excellent at raising issues that critics present, but somewhat short on whether it delivers what its fans say.
For some children, it plainly does not work. Anyone with epilepsy is a poor fit. The school should have at least made reasonable accommodations for those whose special needs present such obvious conflicts. That they apparently did not may say a lot about the kinds of support the school offers for special needs students. I’d argue, at least students that experience other problems (if not all) should be able to switch to a more traditional program.
Summit sounds like it could be a good traditional GED substitute for high functioning kids that have trouble with absenteeism, etc. If school presents a problem, getting lessons done at home or at the library could help them more than weekend detention.
It doesn’t sound helpful for kids that thrive in a traditional classroom, or for those whose strongest learning styles are tactile, interpersonal, etc. Maybe, schools that offer honors, academic, college prep, and basic levels for subjects, could use it in the basic level to free the teacher(s) up to support the students that struggle most.
This article makes it look like Summit is for independent, not necessarily ambitious/curious types, but maybe it has potential for those too if it offers some specialized (rare) lessons.
3
I grew up in the “belly of the beast” and here (the SF Bay Area) the child is King. A coworker whose son has learning “differences” has placed him in a Summit School here. On his laptop all day at school; glued to his phone all night and weekends. Because he’s learning disabled she doesn’t want him participating in a regular public high school for fear he’ll be humiliated at some point, or fall behind. He’s a bright kid but she’s bending his environment in order to, in her words, “keep him happy and confident no matter what.” Well, good luck with that. Looks like she’ll have to follow him into college, through work internships, at his new job, at his subsequent jobs...where does it end? She’s raising a child who can’t deal with life on life’s terms. How would that be considered an education?
10
As a nation, Facebook is the biggest lemon we ever bought. It's time to shut them down before they worm their way into every institution we have.
16
I have mixed feelings about this. Digital books are cheaper than paper books. It does teach computer skills, which is good for paper writing and such. It also provides accountability for reading and assignment completion. Bad is to use it as the sole solution for education. Hand writing skills and working math problems on paper is important. Dedicated educators are very important. Think if tech is applied in schools that there needs to be a balanced approach. Hesitate to say they should get rid of it completely as college papers are created and printed from computers. If tablets are not provided by schools, then parents will need to purchase for higher education. Science and Engineering are heavy computer based careers.
1
Why do they bother even transporting the kids to school every day? Such a horrible schooling structure. But this is where we are, where we have chosen to be as a society. Skyrocketing inequality, great wealth in the hands of few, underfunded public services. Keep voting Republican!
If the billionaires truly were generous, they would just give and leave program design to the experts and permit local decision-making.
4
Silicon .Valley are Dems; Obama received more corporate $ then McCain & Mitt;
1
Sounds like a scheme to intensify young people’s addiction to screens rather than three dimensional life. Think of candy cigarettes.
11
Each teacher has specifics and different quality. Students come across a mediocre teacher in one year and a fantastic one in the next. (My high-school history teacher was a communist, but we all knew that and it's not a big issue.) Human teachers have this diversity which I appreciate. Machines do not.
7
Large chunks of education in the future will be like this, but not to this extent. This is the critical error the program is making. The kids should not be spending more than 2-3 hours a day doing this. The rest of the school time should involve projects, group puzzles, art, physical exercise, music lessons, etc. These personalized learning programs can efficiently replace the most boring parts of teaching/learning and free time up for more group activities and directed play. You can't outsource a child's education to a computer. That could be even worse than no education at all.
6
@Aaron This article is incredibly misleading. The Summit Learning program is supposed to be implemented in exactly the way you suggest. My partner is a Summit principal who says his kids use the platform for about 25% of their school day; that's it. The rest of the time is face-to-face whole group or small group learning, projects, discussions, electives, mentoring, etc. This article does a disservice to the discussion by presenting an erroneous picture of what "Summit Learning" actually is and does.
2
This is such a puzzling article. It describes the circumference of the area the problem occupies without touching on what the problem itself was. What is Summit teaching? How did they customize 'education'? I mean education is such a vague term. For a farmer, educating his family would mean a boost to his revenue through farming or livestock raising. Of what use does he have for exotic literature or even American history. For an urban kid, why does a method of farming impinge on a rather sedentary, boxed in life, at least in the beginning. Perhaps a little humility and understanding of needs would be a beginning towards what education might encompass.
1
First Sam Brownback then Kris Kobach, and now Summit. What will it take for Kansas residents going to realize that the Republican party has conned them?
9
Zuckerberg is a Dem
3
Sounds like it’s not going that great. Maybe Betsy DeVos should be alerted!
7
“frees up time for teachers to do what they do best — mentor students.”
What does this even mean? What I do best is hopefully teach, regardless of the medium. If "mentoring" is one's guiding educational philosophy then the children in that class are being denied fundamental educational instruction. Like a pencil and paper, chalkboard or whiteboard, books and notebooks, computers are still just tools for learning, not a means.
11
Chilling article. Forgetting about the money to be made from selling Summit, etc., there’s something very creepy about this whole setup—creating a more permanent, complacent, less troublesome underclass to serve their masters. Sounds like silicon valley is working out a strategy for the future of their own children!
13
Zuckerberg and his wife and not educators. Why are they making choices for any students anywhere on the world?
705
@Margot NYC, good question but then again why is Betsy Devos The Education Secretary? Norms and best practices are out the window.
90
@Margot
Because their involvement has nothing to do with preparing students to investigate ideas.
The boy-billionaire and his wife are signaling their virtue.
Like Gates before them, they are signaling to society, and to Congress, that we should ignore their company's trashing of our competition laws and its monopolistic power because ... they're _virtuous_.
This is what is called a "redirect."
73
@Margot My personal conspiracy theory about this Zuckerberg effort: another Facebookian avenue to capture and utilize US population information for profit and manipulation. All under the guise of education transformation.
83
For God's sake, hire enough teachers, pay them decently, and buy enough books already. Pay your school taxes, and spend enough on the schools for kids to learn something. Stop wasting taxpayer money to keep the computer industry rich.
25
Google (I know, I know...) "Facebook" and "friendly fraud." Reason enough to make one skeptical.
3
A child spending all day pecking out answers to a screen quiz is no different than a rat spending all day pressing a bar for food pellets, and the rewards are just as transient.
21
Just remember, if its 'free', then you are not the Customer, you are the Product....
16
Education isn’t only about passively memorizing or ingesting information. It’s about leaning to be a clear communicator or trusted leader or about making a strong argument or learning how to analyze a problem or about thinking creatively. My parents are immigrants from a country whose educational system prioritizes rote learning over creative thinking. My mom used to marvel at how I was being taught and at how I could have original thoughts that would merit a 10-page paper. Summit doesn’t sound like the holistic American educational system my mom always praised.
10
As a university associate professor of psychology, I have largely "abandoned" on-line learning, after realizing what I should have known all along. While teaching and explaining difficult concepts, my "instructor-student" rapport seems to be a key ingredient in active class engagement and subsequent student application of material learned. If this is not present, then have them stay home all day and play on the internet. Then they can do it again, "after school". What a fun life.
6
I just read this, and as has mentioned, it not surprising at all. What they don't get is that there is a difference between self-directed learning and classes run by teachers.
3
I am wondering whether or not successful adaptation to Summit depends on the level of introversion and/or extroversion of each child.
3
As a Silicon Valley scientist, I want the rest of the country to know that we scientists all send our kids to schools with strong teacher influence. We would NEVER teach our kids off a computer screen. The computer is a tool, not a teacher. You wonder why they did not try this in the San Francisco Bay area? Because we parents would never allow it.
31
Invariably, people who oppose programs like Summit are labeled as not wanting change. And yet there is plenty of evidence out there that these and similar programs further none of the learning outcomes they are promised to satisfy. Kind of like how tax cuts are supposed to pay for themselves.
10
As a retired educator I can see the appeal of this to government. Fewer teachers needed so costs are cut. Computer programs can be tailored to suit the ideology preferred by the state and don't give personal opinions that might clash with party line. We have seen the effect that Facebook has had on society at large. do we really want to turn them loose in the classrooms?
13
“We’re allowing the computers to teach and the kids all looked like zombies.”
You mean they don’t have Mr. Zuckerberg’s ebullient personality?
10
I think there is a need to meet students where they are, not where they should be. A computer curriculum of tests and competence based progress may be able to assess that in an adult. But that doesn't mean such an approach is appropriate at a younger age. Out species is remarkably slow to learn because there is so much to take in. Concentrating it and making the student the motivation for self progress seems too ambitious for this age group.
We need a better way to get good teachers in front of students than a canned plan. We can't disrupt education, we have to value it as a human endeavor and noble profession.
9
This article does not provide enough information to allow having a meaningful discussion, yet there are so many comments from people who are making assumptions and conjectures based on their political views.
Also the difference in attitude in different parts of the country is striking. Schools with a similar philosophy in the Bay Area have so many applicants and admission lotteries with slim odds! I've been to one and seen how many kids are thriving, and learning many skills beyond the curriculum. It's not for everyone though, some kids switch to more traditional schools.
2
Education is a profoundly social and socializing experience. That may be its most important function. No wonder these kids felt isolated and anxious.
7
I agree with earlier comments that state the need for what this article is missing: specific authentic examples of Summit curriculum and screens, and aggregate percentages of total Summit students by school district that have negative experiences. This article is more about opitionated anecdotes without specific data.
Some ideas of what might be occurring:
- Kids brought up with infrequent screen time suddenly introduced (forced) into near full-time screens (6-7 hours/day, 5 days per week). That might make even me have seisures!
- Some districts may be "overachieving" with available cost savings: fewer/reassigned/spread-thin teachers who no longer spend quality time with students. "Any questions? No? OK, see you next week!"
- In a traditional teacher-led classroom, students who are brave enough to ask questions aloud draw out other students who may be lurking in the shadows of embarrassment and shyness. Good teachers who learn the individual quirks of their students quickly pick up on this and will dive deeper, and re-teach use a different formats/methods to reach those with different learning styles, and use Socratic open-ended questioning to drive more thorough and deeper thinking.
Summit software can do NONE of that, and teachers are unavailable when students need them most, when students are puzzled and have questions in the middle of sorting out a lesson.
5
Yet another profession will be lost to AI. If teachers are now demoted to mentors, at some point, they will become completely fungible. So depressing.
7
"designed by Facebook engineers," should tell you all you need to know, what a shame that this kind of garbage is allowed to use mostly lower income and rural families as guinea pigs, how about Zuckerberg and his Pediatrician wife sponsor a charter school in Manhattan or Orange County and see how many wealthy parents would send their kids to this mindless experiment, creating data points for Facebook and Google, data points that can be tracked through the entire lives of these poor students, not to mention the (most likely) inferior education this experiment will provide... also, this is not "free," it is taking (more accurately stealing), without consent, what is rapidly becoming the most valuable asset any human will have left, our data, and giving it for free to Facebook and Google... what a disgusting and sad statement regarding public education in the United States...
13
As soon as the profit motive entered the sector, the idea of education changed. No longer was education for the benefit of humankind, it became a commodity to be traded, sold and manipulated for profit. Thus we have 'innovations' like Summit.
While there is absolutely a place for technology in the classroom, the interference of economic rationalism in pedagogy has ensured that studies about its effectiveness are constantly influenced by financial considerations. Researchers must start objectively looking at how to incorporate technology into a classroom setting in a way that doesn't replace, but complements, proven effective teaching practice.
Whether we have the ability to do this research without the influence of corporate greed is debatable.
4
So when hours and hours are spent alone on their devices with social media, I never hear about problems such as headaches, eye strain, etc. Wonder why?
4
@Ed C
Education is not the same as socializing on-line.
But you know that.
1
My Aunt Peg Keys taught first grade in Kaukauna grade school for 45 years. Same school district, same school, same grade, same classroom. She has two masters degrees in education, one from Stanford, one from Kansas. She speaks fluent Spanish, plays the guitar, and at age ninety still volunteers at the Thousand Island nature center along the Fox River, and still teaches first grade reading to immigrant ladies, using the same textbooks that she used in 1950’s. Former Governor Republican Scott Walker calls these teachers like Peg - “gravy trainers”.
Recently she was invited to a Hmong wedding in Milwaukee. There were 500 Hmong attendees, and 2 non-Hmong attendees. My sister and Aunt Peg. For the first toast of the wedding dinner, the grandmother of the bride stood, and said, “ I would like to introduce a very special person, my first grade teacher, Ms. Keys. I was 6 years old when I came to America, spoke no English, was scared to go to school that first day in Kaukauna. Ms. Keys pulled up a chair at the front of the class, had me come up and sit next to her, she introduced me to my classmates, and then read to me from this book (displayed), where I saw my first English words, and began talking English for the first time. I am so thankful and grateful to Ms. Keys for being my teacher and helping me fit in to our society. (500 applaud).
I don’t think a laptop computer was ever or will ever be introduced at a wedding in this fashion, as it is not a living person.
39
Thank you for this story, and God bless your Aunt Peg.
15
@Tim Shaw Great story. This really hit my heart because my mother was a teacher. You have just articulated in your comment why we have public education and the purpose that public education serves. I also thank Ms.Keys and you as well.
10
This piece quotes a few parents and a few students' complaints, but does not address the majority of students and parents who say anything good about the Summit approach. And how about actual results? How are students performing across all Summit programs?
As a former educator with experience in software industry (yes, Silicon Valley), I know first hand that 1-2 percent of parents make all the noise and get the attention of the school board.
For all the complaints about education being "broken," a few naysayers can keep it broken, just by sabotaging new approaches. Are these kids in Kansas going to all work in local factories and farms? Where are they going? If they aren't accustomed to working and learning online, will they be looking for employment at the local retail stores?
It might be interesting to correlate the number of parents who criticize the Summit program with those who also deny climate change or those who refuse vaccinations for their kids. Remember, we're talking about Kansas folks.
Also, this seems like a perfect topic to blow out of proportion on our social media, highlighting the division in Red State America. Aided by some foreign government, say, Russia?
By the way, nothing against Kansas. I grew up on a farm, got my bachelors degree at Minnesota State.
To students: Don't let your parents get in your way. Honor their values if they are right for you, but learn to ask the right questions, and how to separate myth from reality.
3
This whole story reminds me of the Matrix movie. You wake up one day and discover that you've been plugged into a world contrived by computer controllers that isn't remotely real. Kids and their parents are right to rebel against Summit's so-called "learning" program. If public schools want to teach something really worthwhile they should be teaching the SQ3R method of reading comprehension introduced in 1946 by Francis P. Robinson, an American education philosopher in his 1946 book Effective Study (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQ3R). I learned this method in the 1950s at a Catholic grade school. Educators are rediscovering this learning model because it is so effective. It teaches critical thinking as well as comprehension. Without those fundamental skills kids will become simple automatons spewing out whatever computers feed them. The beauty of SQ3R (which stands for survey, question, read, recite, and review) is that it costs very little and all public schools can afford to use it.
4
What I want to know is whether the philanthropists funding Summit are having their own children learn this way. If not, then why do they believe it is permissible to fund efforts to experiment on other people’s children?
14
@Houstonian They are not subjecting their progeny to these education experiments and they fund these efforts because of the profits they personally earn at the back end. By the way ultimately the philanthropists kids become an unchallenged and permanently privileged group. They get to have a good education and "other peoples children" do not.
5
Similar to when Amazon tried to get the lowest bid for their next headquarters, this is another example of tech companies using Midwestern towns and areas without much control over their economies as "guinea pigs" for innovation. This isn't democratic learning; it's a race to the bottom for big companies.
5
I'm a teenager in a private arts-based school. Some of my teachers teach primarily through technology, others don't. I always have and I always will prefer learning through teachers and human contact. I hate math and I have an honestly horrible teacher this year. She teaches us most of our lessons through Khan Academy, a program great for practicing and going farther with learning math but not great for learning the basics. My English teacher gives us most of our assignments online which makes it harder to access and harder to turn in (some of my friends don't have printers at home and we're expected to turn in physical copies). My science teacher, one of my favorite teachers, has us turn in all our assignments through Google Classroom which makes group work a nightmare. On my last report card I had seven late assignments just for science. For high-energy, easily distracted kids like me, the power that comes with a computer is hard to ignore. Why write a report when I can work on my novel? But I'm not allowed to handwrite my thesis. If adults now are smart enough to run the world when they learned on paper and pencil, what's so different now? I don't want to become a slave to my phone or laptop. But it's expected of me.
Oh also, stop complaining kids are addicted to screen nowadays when it's all you adults that chose to give us those screens. Honestly, start taking ownership of your mistakes and work to fix them the way you guys constantly tell me to. Sorry this is so angry.
29
Thank you for your thoughts! You have some very good perspective and I think adults should listen.
4
Zuckerberg translates from the German as "sugar mountain". Right. Pull your children out if his $ummit scam has been bought by gullible, ignorant, ,possibly mendacious school boards. If they don't throw Summit our promptly and replace with well-trained human beings, pool your resources to hire a competent attorney and sue the pants off the responsible party(ies)
We have all seen touching stories about people
in later life looking back to an inspiring teacher who changed their life for the better.
They were not looking back to a sterile, money-making scam marketed by an amoral entrepreneur.
7
Diane Tavenner, a former teacher and Summit’s chief executive, founded a series of public charter schools starting in 2003 called Summit Public Schools and began developing software to use in the classrooms so that students could “unlock the power within themselves.” The resulting program, Summit Learning, is spinning out into a new nonprofit called T.L.P. Education. Ms. Tavenner said the Kansas protests were largely about nostalgia.
“There’s people who don’t want change. They like the schools the way they are,” she said. “The same people who don’t like Summit have been the sort of vocal opposition to change throughout the process."
If this is the grasp on basic language skills the chief executive of Summit has...pull the plug.
6
Kansas parents lost the right to complain about their children's education the moment they elected a right wing economic zealot that single handedly destroyed their public system. If they spent as much time working to fix their government as they do with their pithy little yard signs, they might actually build a future for their children, rather than a stagnant dead end of farms and mechanic shops.
13
@Cassandra
Yes, this is my understanding of the more serlous problem with Kansas schools.
But the Kansas teachers worked with the legislature and apparently were able to get some of their funding restored, and the governor got tossed out (or was appointed to some made-up Federal position by Trump?)and his right-wing radical successor was not elected.
I do not find this situation that controversial. If the program is not working for most of the system's students, try something else. (You might want to allow the kids who ARE benefiting from it to continue using it!)
1
Doesn't literally every child development study say that we should limit the number of hours kids spend in front of screens? Who thought this was a good idea?
20
@Matthew Ratzloff
Apparently at least one pediatrician, Priscilla Chang Zuckerberg.
1
This appears to be a cleaver program from Facebook to mine the personal data from students. From Facebook's prospective, there is no value being obtained from the behavior of students sitting in a classroom offline interacting only with a teacher. To get the value from the behavior of students they need to get the students online and what better way than an online learning platform such as Summit Learning. Parents should be rebelling, not only because of adverse health effects from Summit Learning but because their children while in school are being used for the purposes of surveillance capitalism which thrives on obtaining personal data. These data are processed to make behavioral predictions and the results are sold to advertisers. I think it is wrong for Facebook to do this in a school setting (and just about all settings) but this is what their business is all about, obtaining value from the gathering of personal data. When schools are approached to use Summit Leaning they should say no thank you.
19
@Bob Bingo!!! You figured it out. If I had a prize to give I would give it to you....Thanks for this comment.
2
This is criminal.
Money is all that matters to small school districts in Great Plains states like Oklahoma (and Kansas). Our teachers finally went on strike last year and the legislature gave them a $1K raise and since the state is penniless, they passed on 75 percent of that raise to the local schools which absolutely cannot afford it. Many were already out of money and have nowhere to turn for help.
The districts can't operate without electricity, water, heating and A/C and they can't park their buses. The only way they can balance their budgets now is by cutting teachers. According to Zuckerberg, they can be replaced by a few hundred or thousands of Chromebooks.
Administrators were sold a load of goods by Z and his wife Chan, who sits as chairwoman of the board for Summit Learning which recently re-branded itself as TLP Education for the 2019-2020 school year. (Chan, does Summit already have such a bad reputation you had to drop the name?)
We've passed tax cut after tax cut for every corporation and one-per-center who didn't need it, and now that small schools are broke, Z is selling the idea that a few $300 Chromebooks can replace a $36K certified classroom teacher. I guess we'll just sit and stew in our own ignorance.
Yes, you read that right. We start certified, Bachelor's degree-holding teachers at $36,601. All that plus 10 years experience, a Master's degree and National Board Certification in their subject area bumps their pay to just under $45,000.
21
Tech and charter school company profits turning our kids into screen-addicted zombies.
Insurance and pharmaceutical company profits obstructing universal healthcare.
For-profit prisons driving mass incarceration.
Military contractor profits driving endless wars.
Oil company profits driving climate change.
Does anybody else see a pattern here?
The problem is a system in which major social decisions are made based on what is profitable for those who are already rich. The problem is capitalism. Those who think it just needs to be better regulated are missing how the same forces that incentivize all of the above inevitably also incentivize a constant war to reverse or circumvent whatever regulatory restraints are imposed.
When they were forced to free their slaves they immediately sought out new ways to get cheap labor with sharecropping and Jim Crow. When we won the right to unionize they pushed through Taft-Hartley to cripple the labor movement. When we made quality public education a right, they financed a "taxpayer revolt" to defund it. When the costs of the War on Poverty cut into their profits they launched the Reagan Revolution. When we grew weary of Reagan they formed the Democratic Leadership Council and gave us the Clintons. And on and on it will go until they poison the whole planet and shred what remains of our sense of community if it will add a penny a share to their profits.
We need to burn this billionaire-run dystopia to the ground.
14
The internet reduced the cost of sharing knowledge, but when something is free, it has no value.
I have always had to deal with random training at work - from harassment free workplace to insider tradings, but in the last few years, I have found the web-based training infuriating, when every VP can assign mandatory training at the click of a button.
I recently realized - if it isn't important enough to meet with me in person, it isn't important.
10
I don't know anything about the computer program since little information was given in this article. However, where was the outrage when the GOP in Kansas cut education drastically for worshipping the dogma of tax cuts? Where is the outrage in Kansas when "intelligent design" is taught? Opinions from Kansas has no credibility, especially on education. The sign should read: Caution Students, You are now entering Kansas, unless of course you're entering from Oklahoma.
8
It's interesting to read that there isn't yet enough research in this area to judge it. Hopefully, researchers will get on this. However, there are ample studies of students taking assessments using technology (vs on paper tests) and using laptops to take notes (vs on paper) and they show a common theme: that tech interferes with learning. Students taking assessments on paper do better; students who take notes on paper retain more.
We need to stand up and disseminate the truth. We can't allow tech companies to spread false messages that tech works because it's "new/state of the art." We need to better educate educators to look harder and think critically before adopting programs such as this one when they are not proven to help students learn.
7
No matter how good any educational software, it's just a supplement to what a skilled teacher does in the classroom.
And, children should not be made to stare at a screen, hands on mouse and keyboard, all day in school. Just from a physical standpoint alone, that's clearly harmful.
Let teachers use tested, approved software as they see fit.
This sounds like a
6
As someone who works in a cubicle in front of a computer screen for most of the day - I would never wish that on any child. It is a body and soul-deadening experience.
16
What I have learned over the course of 20 years as a teacher and administrator is that learning is about relationships. Period. Students learn when they connect with knowledgeable people who care about them and about the topics they teach.
I hear much more frequently from former students about the passion for a topic that they gained from an instructor who took the time to get to know them than about the cold knowledge they gained in a course (which is all that a computer-delivered program will offer most people) and subsequently lost (which is generally the case).
12
Mark Zukerberg has a strange obsession where he needs to have his name involved in anything his peers are contributing to. In the Bay Area, Marc Benioff of Salesforce has given generously to the UCSF medical program; his name is synonymous with UCSF now. Zukerberg feeling left behind donated to SF General to get his name in front of the hospital, but not to the scale of Benioff. The Khan academy is well thought out and an excellent program sponsored by Google, but Zukerberg needs to create a second rate program to feel he's done something similar to compete with his peers. It's just plan weird and reflects his personality on always playing defense and not listening to advice when it comes to everything including running Facebook.
3
Unbelievable that that Harvard professor comes right out and says he won’t criticise this program because it could impact his funding. Equally unbelievable that this program has been foisted on children (always in poor districts - no way would Mr Z allow his own precious kids to ‘learn’ like this) without any remotely independent assessment of its quality.
9
I like technology. However, we know the pro and cons of social darwinism and how people chose to utilize their time because of the third wave of the industrial revolution--the tech boom. It's the affordability factor. Not all of us are in our retirement years, so although some of us aren't retired we mine as well be. Again, it's the cost factor.
https://www.allaboutscience.org/what-is-social-darwinism-faq.htm
2
I don't see this as an either/or choice. Computers are a modern reality, and there is a lot to be learned from the Internet. However, this kind of program would be most effective when combined with more traditional teaching methods, since school is an important time for learning socialization skills and teacher guidance is extremely important.
The mistake was going all in with this program and removing the human from this equation.
5
The backlash against all things silly cone valley (hehe!) has begun. Our privacy is gone. Our sensitive personal data has been shared or hacked. Now they need to brainwash our kids so they can consolidate their manipulation. It’s very interesting how smart and empowered these parents and kids are.
5
I spent most of my adult life in and around Silicon Valley, and I confirm that the families of scientists, software developers, and pretty much anyone else with at least a Bachelor's degree in STEM almost universally view the use of "learning software" in primary and secondary education as a plague to be avoided at all costs. There are precisely three legitimate uses for computers in K-12 education: to teach computer science, to search library catalogs, and as a replacement for an encyclopedia (one additional legitimate use is for the school to communicate with parents, via email). All other learning activities are much more effective when done in-person or on paper. Just like a prudent parent would never do to their child what a good doctor would never do to theirs, a prudent parent would rather starve than let their children be subjected to screen-based education.
14
It's no secret that the brain's ability to reason & plan ahead isn't fully developed until around age 25, when the pre-frontal cortex takes charge. Asking pre-teens to complete self-directed studies is naive.
I'm a college instructor & teach some self-paced online classes. About 3/4 of the students (including a large percentage of non-traditional/adult students) enrolled end up finishing. It's not an easy undertaking--it requires a great deal of discipline and self-direction to complete the required work. In college, students take these classes mostly as a last resort when they need to earn credits to graduate.
I'm not sure how self-paced online learning could have possibly been conceived as a successful model for pre-teens. Just a small bit of research suggests this approach would be setting many students up to fail.
11
Instead of letting Zuckerberg & Chan's limited liability company deliver a bad education to U.S. kids, the U.S. Congress should tax gazillionaires down to some reasonable income to live on. That way the populace has some minor say in how the government money will be spent. After all, it was U.S. policies that allowed these gazillionaires to thrive. And with Zuckerberg's poor record of protecting privacy, he shouldn't be allowed near other people's children.
Lately it seems the future U.S. and it's Congress will be run by gazillionaires who will control our interoperable data and use it to manipulate us. They need to be stopped now. Kudos to the protesters!
12
I think the only people that need to be listened to here are the teachers. Certainly not random posters on this forum. They know the job. They know the kids. Sounds like opinions among them are mixed. I have to wonder. To what extent were teachers even consulted in developing the curriculum? To the extent they now feel like bystanders, I wonder if that's how they felt as the curriculum was developed. The sales job that Facebook needs to do is with the teachers. Not with the kids or the parents. I can develop a curriculum that will make kids and parents feel WONDERFUL. But is there learning going on? Not necessarily.
9
"“There’s people who don’t want change. They like the schools the way they are,” she said. “The same people who don’t like Summit have been the sort of vocal opposition to change throughout the process.”
Well said. Kansas is not known for embracing new ideas the past 200 years. Why not engage with Summit to make it better instead of fearing it.
"Fewer than 40 percent of Kansas students are on track to be academically prepared for college, community college or technical school as measured by their scores on the state’s standardized math and English tests."
7
@Hal
Why do you assume its better because it's new?
1
@jaryn
I'm not saying it's better, be engaged. Try new options.
5 engineers design the software for personalized learning? To make real personalized work at some future time, when AI is far more developed, would likely take more like 500 engineers, or 5000. Plus extensive testing in hundreds of classrooms. Human beings are so varied, and the process of learning so different for each thing to be learned, that this is a really difficult problem. As others have pointed out the Summit software isn't really personalized learning at all.
10
So Kansas tried trickle down economics touted as being “like a shot of adrenaline into the heart of the Kansas economy” which instead five years later left it with inadequate money to keep schools-and much of the state running far below the best level they could.
Their state’s solution, after rewarding corporations with windfalls derived from a wildly experimental fiscal policy already shown in the Reagan years to not work, was to reward another corporation with windfalls for a wildly experimental educational platform.
Why do these billionaires (including Betsy Devos and her unproven ‘technology infused’ “personalized learning” schemes that involve private businesses) get to experiment on the citizenry with publicly funded education?
13
As one who has taught for nearly 50 years I can say with confidence that NOTHING replaces the interaction among human beings, young and old, in terms of generating thought and intellectual growth. Computers are great, I use them, but they are not human.
22
@John Locke
" NOTHING replaces the interaction among human beings, young and old, in terms of generating thought and intellectual growth."
Yeah and it really shows in American society and morals these days right John? Right on up to the POTUS!
1
Zuckerberg tried to buy philanthropic recognition by 'giving' $100 million dollars to the failing Newark, New Jersey school district. Too bad all that cash just melted in the wake of the directive, “business-style management” learning. As with all non-educational experts, it failed miserably. Facebook, stay home and clean up your own act.
9
Too bad the geek, Mark Zuckerberg, never had an inspiring teacher, someone who was so enthusiastic about a subject that students enjoyed every minute of the class.Some of us were that lucky.Computer learning may work as an adjunct to teachers but it is not a panacea-it will not replace effective teachers and the lessons learned in class coordination and cooperation.Kansas has not funded their schools -a very short sighted mistake.
7
"..By winter, many McPherson and Wellington students were fed up. While Summit’s program asks schools to commit to having students meet weekly in person with teachers for at least 10 minutes..."
Wow.
We are creating a culture where people simply will not ever have to interact with one another. Bad enough as it is now, with everybody's face plastered to a screen, everywhere, all the time.
Why do we wonder why our society has become so fractured, despite being "connected" ? The reason is as plain as the screen in your face.
I am all for computer assisted learning programs in our schools; students with a thirst for greater knowledge should have easy access to it. But the Summit program, however well intentioned, sounds very poorly designed. Why am I not in the least surprised that Zukerberg is in on this? That would be a red flag to me.
Ten minutes a week with your "mentor" is nuts.
Then again, we're all nuts to let our politicians gut education in the name of lower taxes. Oh, and freedom.
As Socrates would say, Free-dumb!
10
If it’s got Zuckerberg’s fingerprints on it, then it exists to somehow profit him and his tech bro friends. You don’t have to be a Luddite to be concerned about techs often poorly designed intrusion into education. It’s a monetizing opportunity for the tech crowd and the management level bureaucrats running these schools. That Kansas with its poorly funded schools and conservative political hacks are being targeted shouldn’t surprise anyone. These students and parents are right to be concerned.
9
As a high school teacher in NYC for 20 years, I have found that any use of technology that tries to replace human interaction in teaching is usually a shortcut by schools to meet state requirements and save money. As previous reports published in this same newspaper can attest, and the examples in this article confirm, the use of technology without the proper structure and supervision—without the proper application—can actually be detrimental to learning and sometimes inappropriate for students. As an educator who’s witnessed what can happen in poor communities when schools apply the use of technology loosely and for the wrong reasons, I’m happy to see that some parents and students in Kansas are asserting their authority as the ones who have the strongest say in k-12, public education in any community America.
11
I used a self learning set when I went to school in the 60s. It worked with cards and allowed each student to work and advance at their own pace. That was in the 6th grade in Alabama. Back then it was considered innovative but never really caught on. Wonder why?
3
Zuck was a geek who hung out in his basement with his computers while in high school. He was a geek and his social skills were that of a geek. He drop out of college which could have afforded him an liberal arts education which would have rounded out his thinking.
Now he wants every child to be a geek in the basement and learn jus like he did.
I shudder every time I think of this guy with a geek’s social skills running a social platform. Why do we assume he knows anything but his small silo of computer science and business skills he picked up along the way? Having money does not make you smart about everything!
8
Zuckerberg's initial Facebook spiel was to "connect people". What it became was a means to hawk merchandise and by subtle mind control played into the hands of foreign trolls seeking to influence US elections.
Anyone who thinks computer programmed learning teaches children how to do more than push computer keys and parrot back programmed answers is kidding himself. As for learning critical thinking and stretching imagination, good luck.
2
They best get on board. That is the way of the future. Though as unfortunate as it is, the ability to adapt is the ability to survive. You cant as parents give 1980s advice for a 2020 world.
1
Wish you would tell us how you know that.
4
A lot of the students probably don't like the constant pressure of individualized learning vs just sliding along in a classroom of peers. Continuous optimal performance can be very tiring. A hint to the developers would be to build plenty of slack time in the lesson plans if they want wide acceptance.
4
For the child who has seizures the state of Kansas has accommodations for learning and physical disabilities. Was that not addressed by the school or the school district?
3
I think the point is that students without a history of seizures started experiencing seizures after this learning platform was implemented.
1
Did anyone say unions?
1
Interesting that the well-to-do in our country ( especially those in the Silicone Valley ) do not permit their children to use any " screens "---TV, smartphones, video games, computers etc. until high school.
Educational research, pediatricians and those researching brain development show the negative effects on academic, social and brain development.
The wealthier schools do not use tablets ( ie IPads etc.) in their classrooms as a result. But look around the poorer schools...that's where the widespread use of " a computer for every child" is the most prevalent. And likely does the most damage.
Young children should not be using computers. They should be outside playing, building with blocks and playing with other educational toys, using their imaginations and being creative.
And teachers should be encouraging these activities...not sitting in front of a computer and engaging in rote memorization activities.
5
How about FB employees beta testing this on their own kids?
The one kid who wanted headphones kind of summed it up for me: it sounded exactly like the soul-destroying modern open office environment.
And everything about this is gross: Silicon Valley / FB hubris (just because you can behaviorally trap your users in an ad-supported dystopia doesn't make that model applicable to *learning* or anything else that is actually good or that you actually know what to measure); data hoarding; invasion of privacy; data that will follow the kids forever; it's free so the data is the product just like social media users working for free in the data mine; no doubt there's some angle of an ad-supported version so education becomes crassly commercialized like everything else, and etc, etc, etc.
4
Good teachers are the answer, not gimmicky learning ideas And good teachers cost money. Guess who doesn't want to pay teachers what they're worth? Republicans. Stop voting for Republicans Middle America and your children will receive a great public education. It's simple.
7
my kid LOVED Khan Academy math. It seemed like a fantastic platform for math, at least. We never explored the other disciplines. Kid was starting partial differential equations when she was in second grade. Sad thing is the math offered by public school totally turned her off math. Don't get me started discussing IMP math...
3
I don't know what's worse, Kansas having been deprived of essential educational funds to thrive with deeply flawed "leaders" running it to the ground or having children learn through a tube funded by a deeply flawed narcissist who wouldn't put his own children through that mess all the while making teachers obsolete. This is some next level Ring horror and the kids are stuck in middle.
7
Look at what's happening right now in the Wake County Public School System in NC. They're doing a "new" math program that doesn't teach the students as effectively and pays a lot of money to some company of 2 people in Utah for what's supposed to be "free" education. The opponents Facebook page has gotten about 1000 members in the few weeks it's been created.
2
“Students are becoming self-directed learners and are demonstrating greater ownership of their learning activities”, says a school superintendent.
The corporate speak boggles my mind and makes me so angry.
9
IMHO anything that has the Zuckerberg label should be avoided. He is totally driven by growth of his corporation. I have no knowledge that the Summit program grooms children to become ensconced with the Facebook or other social media properties of FB but I can not not conceive that the FB CEO would pass up such an opportunity.
I am heartened to see that Summit is rejected in some places. Will large urban areas recognize that such a program requires certain talents and social temperament (self-starters who are not stressed by aloneness) to advantage a child. We will all be better off if Summit is a resource for the limited population for which it is appropriate.
2
As a german high school teacher I marvel at the belief that "more technology" is the answer to every existing task and problem. Learning at its core is a highly social process, one of my most important roles as a teacher is providing my students with an example to emulate (n.b. not to copy).
Of course there are computer programs and apps that can help with learning - but I've found that most times the answer to problems that students had with learning was "less tech" not "more tech".
Learning is about using your brain to memorize things, to analyze problems and to construct solutions. To learn these things no computers are needed. Books are needed, because reading is the activity that sharpens intellect most. A pen and paper are needed, because writing things down improves memory most. And most of all discussions with classmates and teachers are needed, to learn from and with others.
Although I'm head of IT at my school I really cannot condone this belief that just because something looks "cool" - like most smartphones and PCs do - it has to be good for the minds of our children. From my experience smartphones et al are more like a drug - administered in small doses they may help, swallowed wholesale they become poison.
10
Summit Learning is not personalized learning, as students have zero voice and choice in the content they study and how they demonstrate an understanding of learning targets. Summit Learning merely tracks progress, in real time, based on a rigid scope & sequence. Authentic personalized learning allows students multiple pathways to demonstrate their learning of clearly communicated skills/concepts using a variety of media. Furthermore, personalized learning involves the curation of Personal Learning Plans (PLPs), whereby students and educators set learning goals, reflect on and document student learning over time.
7
There is such an arrogance to the men and women who are rich and start non-profits.
Bill Gates and his wife via The Gates foundation invested in the CORE program, which was to standardize education across America. They invested in a database in which education companies would use students data to enhance learning and enable teaches to use tech as well as individualize education to each student. Parents freaked out when they found out a company owned by Rupert Merdoch was creating the database. Privacy issues were raised. The project after $100 million investment was abandoned.
Having more money does represent IQ and does not make one all knowing and smarter than experts and people in the trenches. We are so skewed in society’s adoration of the wealthy!
Trump being the most obvious example.
Quick question: does the chef eat the food, or, will Zuckerburg’s kids go to a summit school? Will the children of the engineers that designed it? If the answer is ‘no’, then we know how good it is.
5
"Silicon Valley came to Kansas Schools".
No, actually Summit Learning sponsored by Mr. Z came to Kansas Schools. But lets not miss the opportunity to leverage guilt by association and blast the largest target possible - because it feels better.
2
Because we all know “Silicon Valley” is the heart of all evil. Yeesh!!!
This experiment will go into the dumpster of failed education experiments. I thought back to one from the mid-70s called "open space". A monumental error. Too bad the article doesn't really discuss Summit in greater detail.
Kids need basics, structure and interaction with real people.
4
Gordon Mohn, McPherson’s superintendent of schools added, “Students are becoming self-directed learners and are demonstrating greater ownership of their learning activities.”
If that doesnt sound like marketing bafflegab for reducing services I dont know what does.
6
As a high school teacher in NYC for 20 years, I have found that any use of technology that tries to replace human interaction in teaching is usually a shortcut by schools to meet state requirements and save money. As reports published in this same newspaper can attest, the use of technology without the proper structure and supervision can actually be detrimental to learning—or inappropriate—as some of the examples in this article show. As someone who’s witnessed what can happen in poor communities when schools apply the use of technology loosely and for the wrong reasons, I’m happy to see that some parents and students in Kansas have affirmed their authority as the ones with the strongest say in k-12 education.
4
This method sounds really lonely.
8
Why on earth would anyone let Mark Zuckerberg near their children?
He is the kind of guy who digs through your dumpster looking for your mail to gather info. He is the kind of guy who follows your daughter around to see where she hangs out and what kind of shoes she buys. He is the kind of guy who sits outside your home with surveillance equipment listening in.
Letting Mark into the classroom for any reason will soon escalate into a sidebar with trending stories. Regular commercials telling us to ask our doctor if Mylantra is right for us or why we should buy Geico. Soon, Bezos will jump in and offer "prime" education and for just $9 more per month, you can get your tests two days before everyone else.
But the most devious part will be that every question in the curriculum will be designed to glean more info about your family.
People, if your state needs more money for education do what we did in Washington and legalize pot, tax the daylights out of it, and toss that money into the education budget. That's right. Every time some pothead lights up, he is helping a student learn:) I think the state took in around $275 million last year just from potheads.
And if you need free curriculum, lots and lots of places like MIT college offer free courses online for everything under the sun.
But keep Mark away from your kids.
11
Aren't schools supposed to be for collective learnign where you share idea with others? Sorry Mr. Zuckerberg, your way of teching kids appears to have been an epic fail.
2
The Daily Mail (to quote Wikipedia) "The Daily Mail has been widely criticized for its unreliability, as well as printing of sensationalist and inaccurate scare stories of science and medical research, and for copyright violations" Sarcasm: Good choice. Sarcasm off.
I wonder what Summit does with children that are learning to read? Or can't grasp math? That's got to be a nightmare.
4
Why would anyone think the people in Kansas want to get in the mainstream and use computers for learning. If I remember right the schools had to go the the supreme court to get funding a few years back.
1
See book reviews of "Zucked: Waking Up to the Facebook Catastrophe ", by Roger McNamee . And his cspan and Ted Talk.
W. Post: "McNamee, an early mentor to Mark Zuckerberg and an investor in Facebook, argued that the next 15 years would be all about boosting “engagement” — tech speak for getting users trapped inside digital platforms.
Engagement, it turns out, is just one of Facebook’s bland euphemisms for getting users addicted to its services; its sinister aim is to produce “behavior modification that makes advertising more valuable.”
6
I teach Physics at community colleges and I can tell you that my students learn so much from working in groups and watching their friends tackle problems. Sometimes, a student who seems confused even after my best effort to explain something will understand when a classmate explains it to them. They sort of develop a language to talk about what they are trying to do, that I find scientifically inaccurate and would not use, but nonetheless helps them learn. If you remove this interaction by making kids sit in front of a computer, you take away a key aspect of learning. Some of the things you are comfortable asking your friends, you might not want to ask a teacher. But that doesn't mean you can get rid of the teacher entirely and have students study by themselves. Technically, anyone can teach themselves any subject by reading a textbook but why then have academic institutions endured? Summit learning style might fit some students but not everyone. To get rid of a traditional classroom completely, that too at K-12, where students are learning their basics is a bad idea. Kansas is trying to turn teachers into 'Walmart greeters' and it will not end well for the students.
19
I teach chemistry at a community college and I completely agree...small group learning greatly improves student learning and also leads to social interactions most students need to truly engage in the material. It’s hard to replicate that on a computer. Online classes work well for a subset of students. I would anecdotally state from my own experiences that that subset is small. To make computer instruction the main educational delivery platform for high schoolers is foolish. I can’t even fathom it for grade schoolers.
5
Probably Summit fits only certain kids with certain personalities and desires. Probably the child should experience it for a brief summer trial before enrolling.
3
Turning back the clock to 1975, as a 7th grader, my rural junior high school had a self directed math program. The program was limited to students who had tested well in math in elementary school. We worked individually, with the teacher answering questions and setting a weekly goal of what page of the text book we should be at. We did tests individually on an honor system. The goal was to cover the regular 7th and 8th grade material as well as first year high school algebra in the 2 years of junior high. Those of us who did well finished significantly before the end of the 2nd year and the teacher gave us addition material to learn. This allowed us to go directly into high school geometry and be able to do 5 years of high school math including a full year of calculus.
This program was wonderful for self directed students (those who didn't fit simply when to a tradition class). But I would have trouble imaging it for a full day of classes. Math is cut and dried, so many other area need discussion and context. And of course at that time it was a book, not a screen and keyboard.
3
As an education researcher, I would say that if Summit "...began trials ..,in public schools four years ago and is now in around 380 schools and used by 74,000 students." that this is a scary fast pace at large scale for education research. The "treatment" is a large dose of tech for children held hostage by their school system who grabbed at the freebee. Good for the kids for speaking up.
Students in schools they LIKE to learn in groups through experiential learning with a good teacher setting up activities that teach them the stuff that they are supposed to learn. This does not mean teacher as lecturer or as clerk assigning worksheets.
There are great project-based learning schools evolving that rely on technology platforms used as a tools to keep students organized and on track, and that allow ample access to the big bad internet. Kids learn also how to deal appropriately with that in school. But the real action takes place in the triangle of teacher, students and knowledge.
Such schools are not easy to organize, but they are good for students, teachers, and parents who want their children to learn for the 21st century.
2
As an avid learner throughout high school, I suspect I would have loved Summit. In most classes the curriculum was too slow for me while in other classes I could have benefited from more time. Likewise, I had many great teachers and others who ...weren't so great.
I don't have any experience with Summit but I can't imagine it is much different than other distance learning/homework platforms I've tried in college: Sapling, McPherson, etc.
Still, I can see how this method of delivery would not be for everyone. I would have loved to have had this system in some of the school districts I attended, but I can't see it being beneficial for the majority of people.
8
I wis these conversations would get at the underlying assumptions...grab a good Apple product, teach student critical thinking, use information as a tool to develop skills and knowledge that matters, good teaching is education, not training. This takes well-prepared and empowered teachers, teacher/ leaders, parents and, of course, youth who create the best for the children. Social emotional learning, positive youth development, life-long learning, addressing and solving real problems, developing a community context...this is the developmental arc of good schools. Buy an iPad if you want young people to use a real technology, don’t use Google or Facebook products, don’t forget that they exist to monetize you, and your children. Our single greatest investment is public education and these people are not in favor of good public schools. Check out the NGSS and the undergirding framework for K-12 Science Education for a sense of a better plan. And STEM implies the students are making content not just consuming...big difference! Sheesh!
2
Like every other new educational initiative, this requires extensive training for those who implement it. How much training did admin and teachers get, before it rolled out and during the initial stages (plus frequent follow ups and checking)?
And as with every other learning fad, usually a mix of different strategies and methods yields the best results, as developed in the field by the best and most creative teachers.
3
I’ll support it when the Zuckerbergs and the other tech parents want their kids in automated schools. But all those kids go to Waldorf schools where there is little or no computer “learning”.
13
Rural and urban public schools and related teachers, parents, and children: don’t you get it? You are all too poor to afford quality education. So you get the robots. Now shut up get back to work, glue your eyeballs on the screens and feed your small bills, big data to big tech.
6
This is infuriating. I’d like to ask Mark Zuckerberg and Priscilla Chan Zuckerberg to enroll their two young daughters in a school that uses Summit. But we know they won’t because parents in Silicon Valley, especially those who work in tech and create the very products we are all addicted to, won’t let their kids near technology because they know firsthand how harmful it is.
21
When Gallup conducted a survey of 40,000 students (college age), they identified 6 major themes that students value - among them interactions with teachers, other students, club organizations.....get my point. Tech should not be involved in designing education. Ever. Tech makes great tools to enhance the experience, but it is great teaching that makes the subject jump from the page and drives student engagement. Students are people. People need people. Sone years ago, after a severe TBI (traumatic Brain Injury), my Neurologist told me that the best way to recover was to spend time in conversation and write using my hand.....yes letters. I recovered. I can go on with one demonstrated story after another., I hope that this is a lesson to school districts and parents that teachers are worth it and good education is worth it and tech has it’s place, but is not a substitute for what is really worth it - our children.
5
I have no link to or direct experience with the Summit Learning.
I do have 16 years of experience with being a student in on-line classes run by MIT, Duke, Stanford and many others; all in all I took some 50+ 6-12 week long classes ranging from 3rd year Uni. to graduate level. Mainly in Math Physics but also Philosophy, Greek and Roman myth etc.
I take them at home, do a serious amount of the required reading and all homework and exams.
I consider this mode to be the future of study, certainly in tertiary education.
You get the best lecturers, great aids to study (graphics video) and lots of on-line interaction with fellow students.
You can see how "controversial" subjects like Darwin's evolution theory would be seen as a problem in some places, but the opportunity for normal students in areas where education budgets are tight, to experience top lecturers and teaching aids is priceless.
Class teachers have time to go over the difficult bits, give struggling students more helping hand, before they start failing.
6
@PaulDirac Tertiary (college) education is a world apart from elementary and even high school education. What might work with adult or near adult age independent learners is a likely disaster with average children. (25 years of teaching experience, much of it using computers, here)
2
There is so much wrong with this idea; where does one start?! Two thoughts: this sort of 'learning' goes against every bit of knowledge we have about how the human species actually learns, which is by mutual cooperation and the completion of actual tasks, and do we really want the same people who are really only interested in monetising every aspect of us to be in charge of our kid's brains during these vulnerable years?
This sounds more like the basis for a dystopian science fiction movie than a useful method of educating the next generation.
8
I am really old school...I went to a one-room schoolhouse in rural New England for first grade! (2 grades and 15 kids.) My entire public school class through eighth grade was never more than 10 students.
So when my son was failing in a crowded first grade classroom that basically was teaching to the lowest common denominator, I decided to homeschool him. It worked. He ended up graduating with honors from an Ivy League school.
Homeschooling is the ultimate "personalized" education, so I can see the goal here is the same. But I did it one-on-one and at a time when there was no social media and still dial-up Internet. We used books, with computers basically for word-processing.
The issue here is clear: too much dependence on computers is never going to work. It takes the human teacher engaging with each student actively throughout the day through mentoring, activities and real books! The computer can't replace a teacher.
The program can work, ironically, if the computer time is minimal AND parents are actively involved with supporting their child and the teachers. Old school stuff, indeed.
7
I have no direct experience with the Summit Learning.
I do have 16 years of experience with being a student in on-line classes run by MIT, Duke, Stanford and many others; all in all I took some 50+ 6-12 week long classes ranging from 3rd year Uni. to graduate level. Mainly in Math Physics but also Philosophy, Greek and Roman myth etc.
I take them at home, do a serious amount of the required reading and all homework and exams.
I consider this mode to be the future of study, certainly in tertiary education.
You get the best lecturers, great aids to study (graphics video) and lots of on-line interaction with fellow students.
You can see how "controversial" subjects like Darwin's evolution theory would be seen as a problem in some places, but the opportunity for normal students in areas where education budgets are tight, to experience top lecturers and teaching aids is priceless.
Class teachers have time to go over the difficult bits, give struggling students more helping hand, before they start failing.
There are already forms of personalized learning out there - Montessori and Waldorf, to name the two best-known methods. Notably, these two methods also rely on tactile learning, not technology. Technology is NOT needed for self-directed learning. Learn from Montessori and Waldorf (note: we send our kid to a regular public school, as we can't afford private) and find ways to make the classroom a better environment for intellectual, social, physical, and mental health WITHOUT the isolation, eye strain, sedentary-ness, privacy issues, and of course profiteering of computer technology.
9
Some years ago, I began receiving what eventually became a torrent of emails from textbook publishers asking me for my "best practices" and offering "workshops" online in how to use their online materials. It stunk to me. Obviously textbook publishers were in the first stages of taking over public education, removing teachers from the equation, and substituting even more standardized testing for face-to-face instruction. Why? Profits, baby. Publishers began "bundling" their access codes, for a stiff fee, with their over-priced textbooks. Eventually it became difficult to order just the textbook and many ordering "mistakes" were made at the campus bookstore. Professors soon realized it's easier to bypass the rip-off of textbooks and just print their own course pack from both online materials and one's own handouts. I'm happy to hear of this student and parent revolt. More power to them.
11
Such hypocrites. If education via technology is so great, why do so many tech executives send their children to Waldorf schools? When Jobs was asked how much time his children spent on tech devices by Walter Isaacson, he is said to have replied none - he does not let his own children use tech devices. Meanwhile, Apple was pushing technology into schools.
They shelter their own children from what they know is nefarious while laughing all the way to the bank.
13
Turning kids into zombies. Isolate them, control them, no social interaction, no need to interact with the teachers. No need to learn how to write, turning a page in a textbook. Silicon Valley as with all big businesses are only interested in making huge profits by controlling and herding the sheep. i'm glad some of the sheep at least are standing up and resisting. Gotta love the comments the tech industry reps gave. Classic blaming the victim nonsense.
9
There's a reason for the "No child left behind", but at the end it is up to each person to have the future he wants to have....
Ha! Really?
"“Summit demands an extraordinary amount of personal information about each student and plans to track them through college and beyond,”"
If your child is on SOCIAL MEDIA it has already happened....
4
@Think bout it- not quite like this. Kids don't post their school records online, nor at this time do school districts.
1
I know this is petty, but if you are hiring someone to run your online education initiative, she should at least master basic subject-verb agreement.
8
I’ll be petty with you, then, because I had exactly the same thought.
2
We got no information about the subjects being taught. So now all we know is that some students had serious problems with lots of screen time (like the student with epilepsy) and we heard from many parents unhappy with ???? There were two examples of students being referred to unsuitable places on the internet. What were the tests like? What did teachers think of the lessons (they did try them, right?). How do students from Summit Schools compare to students from regular Public Schools?
The article needs a rewrite.
5
It’s “common knowledge” that teachers really don’t add much to the educational system and that successful business types know what’s best for schools and students.
1
Would the Zuckerbergs and the school officials who introduced Summit, subject their own kids to it? I think we all know the answer to this question. Nope! But it's ok to subject other peoples' kids, especially when it makes 'em money.
6
Are we really okay with letting the same group of people who’s idea to “connect” people was “move fast and break things” try to “democratize” education?!!!
Look how divided that thinking made this country. It’s NOT democracy when only a few decide for the rest.
Amp up the outrage!
670
“Amp up the outrage” is a disturbing sentiment no matter what you believe.
12
@Jamie You see a link between Zuckerberg's "move fast and break things" philosophy and the political and cultural divisions now affecting us? Perhaps you can explain it to the rest of us. It escapes me completely.
I trust you'll address Zuckerberg's actual philosophy of innovation, and not the five-word tag line he uses to identify it.
5
@Orthoducks Who cares about Zuckerberg's philosophy of "innovation"? Zuckerberg had the chance to evolve FB into something that served the good, but much of FB has devolved into a polarized echo chamber (and a tool of foreign agents), further dividing the nation. It's a platform that fosters alienation and depression. Had Zuckerberg consulted political experts, social critics, philosophers, historians, cultural anthropologists, psychiatrists, etc. the platform might have had a chance to be something great. Instead, because Zuckerberg is ultimately irresponsible, greedy, and reckless, we get the net-negative that is FB.
31
"Let the kids out for recess, HAL."
"I'm sorry, Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that."
14
I was an IT Professional for 40 years and now retired. This sounds like a can of worms. Computer based learning isn't so bad when you get into specific advanced adult situations where a student has a well founded education. That is not in High School or even any level of grade school.
Part of my job involved teaching IT skills to professionals making the transition. They had problems that required hands on help just dealing with the technology so they could then deal with real skills learning.
This really smells of a scam on School Districts that just can't raise the money or have lowered teacher salaries to the point that they can't hire any more. It's "Pretend School on the cheap".
8
@Paul Blais
It also sounds like typical IT arrogance. Zuckerberg thought he saw an opportunity to computerize learning and then assigned 5 whole Facebook engineers to design the software. What could possibly go wrong?
4
And Mark and Priscilla will enroll their own children in Summit Learning? Yeah. Right!
9
I am a parent of a child in a Summit school. We are very satisfied with their program. The important thing, is that unlike the traditional public school I attended, it is not a “one size fit all” approach. Each child advances in each subject at their own pace. A child who is good in math, but struggles with English composition can approach those two areas at a pace that meets their needs for each one.
Also, the school offers much more one on one mentoring for the student than the traditional classroom, which offers almost no personal time. In addition, the teaching staff is much better trained than other schools as well. The curriculum is also richer and has much more and better organized content than I have seen in a traditional setting.
However, it is not a situation that is right for every child. For example, there is very little offered in the way of sports. For some students, that is a huge deficit. And of course, the self motivation needed is not what every student has in their make up.
By the way, the Chrome Books are free, and I would never use Facebook or any social media for that matter. I have a very negative and skeptical attitude about that product.
4
"Plus c'est la change...," as that certain Frenchman reputedly said back in those heady days of La Belle Epoque. And almost expectedly, Bel Kaufman's "Up the down staircase" and Paul Goodman's "Compulsory miseducation and the community of scholars" lambasted public schooling with a scathing critique during that anxious equipoise between the fab 50's and Vietnam. Fast on their heels came Cliff Stoll, who with tongue planted squarely in cheek said, "Computers in classrooms are the filmstrips of the 1990s."
Most recently we've been hearing the high-pitched whine of certain education critics, especially in the Republic's heartland. Their complaint apparently is the "digitization of the classroom," whose praises these very same critics sang loud and enthusiastically a scant couple decades ago; while their contemporary, Mr. Stoll, humorously if not sarcastically compared it to filmstrips, a fab-50s "innovation."
My only comment on this perverse volte face comes from Pink Floyd's late-70s song "The Wall," to wit:
"We don't need no education;
We don't need no thought control;
No dark sarcasm in the classroom;
Teacher, leave them kids alone;
Hey, teacher! Leave them kids alone;
All in all it's just another brick in the wall..."
3
My first impression, Summit was introduced and implemented with little training for students and teacher transition. We've seen this with many ideas in the past, as in the open classroom and multiple new thinking in education. Bottom line is always in the details of preparing for any new process.
For decades, outside “experts” have been trying to dictate, dominate and now replace the teacher in the classroom. At first it was with formulaic lessons and curriculum, catchy buzzwords and education fads (whole language), then they added “data,” now it's all that plus technology. As an educator with 20+ years of experience, I understand why - passionate, experienced teachers are hard to create and maintain, and lots of folks want a piece of the education dollar. Really, just leave us alone! My classes and students were far better off before all these new directives. Student directed learning? Thanks charter schools! Let kids decide if and what they want to learn. A great teacher makes kids interested in learning about something they never heard of. My daughter loves band and all kinds of nerdy band music because her band teacher makes it fun and interesting. In my global history classes, I try to teach the human story about places and people they would never have thought to explore. The Finnish model where teachers are highly trained and supported isn’t sexy and won’t increase corporate profits but seems to produce the results the “experts” keep promising us. If we want to chase something chase a formula that is proven to work.
9
Change is scary... I know that but this type of learning is not for everyone... meaning that an online platform needs students to read a lot, to be organized and to be in a way self-directed child.
My kid has been doing a high school online program from a State University and she has so much time now to do other activities that she really enjoys without the lousy after school activities that some public school offer due to a lack of budgets.
Worry about screening time...? Have you seen your kids on parties or gatherings???? They barely talk to each other...The problem has been already there for a long time....so, at least when they are on a screen, they would really been learning something this time....
3
This article is long on repetitive anecdotes and short on information. What is it exactly that the parents and students don't like about this program? Is it used exclusively to replace all teacher-led instruction? Do the students (or their teachers) receive any guidance on the most effective way to use the software? Are they objecting to the amt. of time spent on the computer? Or do they object to computers in the classroom, period? Also, none of the classroom teachers (sorry...mentors) in either of the schools in quoted, just administrators.
6
The upstream question is *why do* underserved schools exist in Kansas? The answer is that the Kansas legislature has consistently failed to adequately fund the schools in Kansas particularly in rural areas. Then the adopt Summit Learning as a way to get around this on the cheap.
Notice that as mentioned in the article, the folks in Silicon Valley flock to send *their* kids to tech-free schools, while turning the underfunded public schools in Kansas into a tech-heavy revenue stream.
Here is an alternative. Kansas is not a poor state. Maybe it could institute a progressive income tax adequate to implement the highly successful Montessori approach in all of its rural schools. Then you might see some of the SV techies moving to *Kansas* so their kids could get an excellent education while they themselves *work remotely.*
Just a thought.
6
If communities are unwilling to support educational taxes that pay for schools and all associative costs related to same, they'll pay the price in alternatives which may be considered by parents as unpleasant to downright awful. It's not rocket science.
3
By the way many of the titans of Silicon Valley send their children to Montessori schools.That form of education (Montessori) is all paper and pencil until the 5th or 6th grade. But this is what they come up with for everyone else's kids. They really want the next generation to be chock full of obedient consumers as well as robotic obedient workers. The latter is only until they can create robots to take all of our jobs away.
6
@Marian Correct. And some of those Titans send their kids to Waldorf Schools, which are like Montessori on steroids.
3
This article brings back a painful period during my teenage years. When I was entering the 7th grade, my elementary school implemented an individualized system of learning designed by the Westinghouse Corporation. It was called Project Plan. Students were supposed to walk into math or social studies or English or science and pick out a TLU (teacher learning unit) in that subject, complete the work on their own, and when they were finished with it they were to ask the teacher for a test on that unit of work. We were supposed to work at our own speed.
Of course, many of us struggled with this unstructured and loose format. There was no motivation in it. Some of us needed the strong and guiding hand of a teacher to compel us to do better. We needed a teacher to lean on, to encourage us. I don't remember my teachers doing any actual teaching during those two years. Consequently, when I got to high school I found myself behind my classmates. I had missed out on the review that takes place in 7th and 8th grades, especially in subjects like math. I struggled mightily throughout high school and never regained the academic confidence that I'd had in my early years of school.
In short, nothing--no computer program or website--can replace a dedicated and knowledgeable teacher working with a strong curriculum.
8
Facebook is proving no better at automating education than they are at automating relationships. Why do we continually look to technology to replace people. There is no substitute for a gifted and motivated teacher, and no amount of software that can replace intentional curiosity or inspire a bored and unmotivated student. The hubris of Silicon Valley's techies is turning us all into screen-saturated robots, and they are rewarded with riches and mindless public awe. Ray Bradbury was right in Fahrenheit 451 --- there is no substitute for books.
7
I'm most disturbed by the "one size fits all" approach in Summit. Not all children benefit from this kind of isolated, self-directed learning. In fact, the personality most suited to this approach is, you guessed it, computer nerds and web developers. Howard Gardner at the Harvard School of Education has talked for years about the "multiple intelligences" in human beings. Some people excel at book learning, others by the hands-on approach, and still others make great social connections and need interactions with people. Yet this Summit program appears one-dimensional and narrow in its methods despite using the web. Why haven't we recognized the individuality in children and their different needs in order to learn? Gardner's research has been around for decades.
14
@DJY I agree with much of what you are saying. However, "one size fits all" and "one dimensional in its methods" are exactly opposite to what these schools really are.
Brave New World!
I studied Huxley in college, maybe Zuckerberg did, too.
In my case, the idea of state control from inception and gestation throughout a predetermined life was not palatable. It seems that Zuckerberg has taken the opposite idea - initiating a lifetime of tracking for these children as mentioned by another commenter.
Run.
6
I'm generally supportive of incorporating technology into the classroom. I think getting students access to computer science content early, for example, can help get kids who traditionally would eschew math and science to get interested in STEM. However, replacing a teacher with self-learning on a computer seems insane. This isn't just some alternative school for people who struggle in a traditional environment- it's the whole school district! Chromebooks and activities on a computer are fine but kids need to have some social interaction in the classroom and everything doesn't need to be at a "self-guided pace."
5
Please note that "Mr. Zuckerberg and Dr. Chan’s philanthropic organization" is a Limited Liability Company (LLC) and thus not considered such under the IRS tax code.
18
Learning and Inspiration comes from a human being not a sterile computer program.
597
Similarities to healthcare and the electronic medical records experience. Negatives will be ignored, critics will be called Luddites, and soon it will forced on all school systems.
5
Zuckerberg was a drop out. Just saying.
6
Summit's chief executive was quoted in the article as saying,"There's people who don't want change."
Perhaps there's a grammar module she might wish to consult.
13
@Marty
Beat me to it!
Amazing, ain't it, that her English is that of a grade-schooler.
3
No way would I allow my kids to be taught primarily online. That approach would drive me nuts, too.
Kansans, you need to pay enough taxes to hire qualified teachers if you want your kids to have a decent education.
19
@Hools I did recommend your comment and want to add that data is being harvested from these students and as we all know our data and our children's data is facebook's profit.
7
@Hools . HAve you heard about
"survival of the fittest"?????
I would be dreading to be your son/daughter right now.... limiting the future and staying behind...
Zuckerberg gets to write off every penny of this “non profit” educational experiment. If we needed any more, this a good reason to raise his tax rate to 70%. Think about how many kids could get a real education with properly funded public schools vs being schooled by a dropout social media parasite who thinks he knows better.
8
Attention fellow regular working Americans. Mark Zuckerberg is not your friend and he does not care if your child gets a good education. Mark Zuckerberg is a billionaire and as such his kids will not be using the public schools or the community health clinic or the local bus and transit system. He and his family will also be taking a private jet or helicopter instead of using the streets and roads that you use that are cracked and full of pot holes. Therefore he does not care if these things which you and your children need and must use should somehow go the way of the dinosaur. This Summit learning system is just one more scheme that a very rich person has come up with to justify de-funding public education. He is doing this to keep from paying his and facebook's fair share of taxes. Please fellow regular working Americans stop falling for it.
30
@Marian ... so yes Kansas... stay behind and be happy like your parents...
and good luck in your future...
Ah, Zuckerberg. The person who started a website that ranks women’s degree of hotness and breast size. Of course, he’s the right man to educate your kid.
10
You get what you pay and vote for. Thanks Sam Brownbeck and Republicans. Excellent education starts with well-resourced, well-paid teachers. Look at what the Secretary of Education proposes. We are in trouble...vote!
14
"Then, students started coming home with headaches and hand cramps. Some said they felt more anxious. One child began having a recurrence of seizures. Another asked to bring her dad’s hunting earmuffs to class to block out classmates because work was now done largely alone."
Doesn't this describe the sensation of working at an open-plan office job?
17
Citizens of Kansas, resistance is useless! While you were all up in arms, guarding against the Orwellian nightmare of a big government, big brother takeover of your lives, you didn’t see the real threat coming. Turns out it was Huxley all along. Pop open that Chrome-ahh and have a dose of soma. Corporations are the faceless overlords that control your lives, not the government.
8
@Fast Ronnie. The corporations control the government, so it’s the Bravest of both new worlds.
1
Let's see. The person who supervises and defends the Facebook learning system does not know how to handle subjects and verbs.
7
..."Summit’s program asks schools to commit to having students meet weekly in person with teachers for at least 10 minutes"...
Why have students sit in a classroom at all? Leave them home to stare at their personalized screens all day long.
The teachers who were happy about not having to create lesson plans should question why the heck they became teachers. Your job is to encourage learning, provide the information and evaluate student performance. You didn't need higher education to become babysitters!
Society should be very worried about who is providing the lesson plans, who is watching their children's performance and what they are doing with that personal information. At best the current students are lab rats at worst they are being programmed for tech addiction.
9
Mark Zuckerberg is an assassin of the mind. He started Facebook as a anonymous misogynistic experience at Harvard. In Silicon Valley, he honed Facebook into a network of faux relationships carried out in social isolation. He grew ungodly rich selling information compiled from people using his creations. He sliced it into micotargeted ads to sell shoes or warp politicos. In Kansas, why would anyone think his education program would do anything other than herd more eyeballs into the virtual - which means not real - world that he’s had such an overwhelming role creating?
7
It really bothers me that Diane Tavenner, a former teacher, was quoted as saying “there’s people who don’t want change.”
8
@Stephanie Armstrong At least she's a "former" teacher and not providing her grammar as an example to students.
1
So the headline references "Silicon Valley". I would like to know what the school districts in Silicon Valley are doing. Are the parents there embracing this type of teaching?
4
In a word, no. Not in the rich towns where Z and his friends live.
It never ceases to amaze me how those who are most aggressively pushing "reforms" or "innovations" in public education are the ones who are in fact most ignorant about what teaching actually is.
2
This type of learning completely fails to include the critical role socialization plays in any healthy society. For most children, socialization occurs during school hours.
While individualized learning might have a role, without daily/hourly interaction with others, children (and the adults they later become) lack a sense of social and community responsibility.
I am so glad that the children and parents are unhappy and rebelling - who wants a society modelled on Mark Zuckerberg's interpersonal skills? Thanks but no thanks.
11
With such a poor record of supporting quality education, I'm surprised Kansas hasn't chopped the budget more and fired all the teachers, after all, who needs them if the computer is now doing all the teaching.
2
If the Summit “personalized learning” curriculum model is so amazing, why not roll it out first in heralded and esteemed Silicon Valley schools? Let the children of tech entrepreneurs be the guinea pigs - not small town America!
5
People are social animals. Any education "innovation" that doesn't take that fact into account and use it will fail.
7
Kansas and every other red state that has underfunded education , health care , social programs the list goes on . Yet they spend plenty of $ on building more prisons and voting in congress to increase the military . Kansas’s priority’s are backwards
6
Facebook and education. That’s and obvious oxymoron.
Mark Zuckerberg and the common good. There’s another one. Read today’s story in NYT how Facebook refused Sri Lankan pleas to remove inciteful comments by religious radicals in the days up to today’s bombings.
10
Personalized learning=teach yourself
6
For decades now parents have caused or allowed their children to be tethered to electronic devices for countless hours each day. The “Electronic Babysitter”. From shortly after birth, they are plopped upright in front of a tv screen to occupy their time. Later, they are given portable electronic games or ipads to play with during car rides, at restaurants or any time that the parents again want to avoid the inconvenience of actual conversation with them. Later come full-blown game systems (eg Wii, Xbox) which will suck countless hours of their time into mindless and often violent games. Then, computers and cellphones where they can idle away their time on social media sites and pornography searches. All of this is seemingly fine in the eyes of most parents, including those interviewed in the article. But now that similar electronic devices are to be used for educational purposes it suddenly is a problem!?
I suspect that the revolt by the students has less to do with the electronics, with which they regularly eagerly engage for games and social chatter, and more to do with the fact that this content is actual “work” rather than the mindless “play” with which they are familiar and enjoy. Newsflash to those students: Welcome to the real world; work can be enjoyable or rewarding but parts can be hard, demanding and sometimes boring! Sorry that your parents stopped conversing with you from an early age. Otherwise they would have shared that reality with you.
2
An integral part of education in reading, math, history, science, english, and the arts, is the ability to comprehend and understand the material, and when they can't, to find the answers to both simple and complex problems. We want our kids to be critical thinkers.
Each student might approach these challenges differently, and our education system has been developed to reflect this. The most valuable lesson we must impart and encourage are the communication skills that are largely absent in the 'machine learning' that this story represents.
Kids and adults alike already bury their faces behind a mobile device, to the detriment of society. This education system personifies that.
We want our kids to be inquisitive, ask questions, and to be curious about the world around them. Teamwork, excellent communication skills, and getting along with others, will determine their future.
This system of education might be effective to supplement an education, but will never prepare kids for a bright and prosperous future. Sounds awful to me.
1
I work in a high school where Chromebooks are used as accessories to conventional teaching methods. Teachers lead classroom discussion and activities in the conventional manner, but when it’s time to research a topic, write a paper, or crank through a worksheet, out come the Chromebooks.
Technology can be very helpful in the classroom if used judiciously. It greatly simplifies distribution and submission of classroom assignments, and storing student’s work-in-progress safely and conveniently. (No more “the dog ate it”!) Reporting grades is simplified. Internet research is enabled through a curated knowledge base that is “kid-safe.”
Best of all, when computers are used sparingly, most kids love to work on them.
But totally eliminating normal, traditional classroom interactions, and chaining kids to a computer screen all day, as if they were office workers for some giant corporation?
That is just wrong. I wouldn’t stand for it for my kids, and I would never work under those conditions. No one knows how this will affect kids in the long run— but chances are it will ultimately prove not only ineffective but also destructive. I wouldn’t allow my kids to be guinea pigs in Zuckerberg’s nasty little experiment.
18
Why would you trust your education to a socially inept college dropout who depends on online addiction, especially at an very early age, for the success of its platform? This is ridiculous
16
Shouldn't there be a person in front of you if, learning is personalized?
7
@Elliot Washor. Personalized learning without people, or learning. Genius!
With reflection, it is doubtful that anybody wants Zuckerberg to mold their children.
10
He’s molding them in what he was like growing up, no social skills or interaction with others. Making mini me’s and probably tapping into their cameras and mics...
'Proponents argue that programs like Summit provide children, especially those in underserved towns, access to high-quality curriculums and teachers.'
No on site 'teachers' necessary ! Part of the 'let's replace humans with AI movement? Let's isolate kids even more ! Eyestrain and vision loss create new markets !
Do any of the 'geniuses' that think up this stuff ever think through ANYTHING?
3
Being a billionaire by no means makes you an expert in education. Remember Newark NJ, that too was a gross failure Mr. Z. From reading this article immediately the superintendent as well as principal need to be fired and removed from having anything to do with education for life.
Kansas made a big mistake years ago by electing a very bad governor who simply wanted to cut taxes for the well to do. Now you’re paying the price for your actions.
As this piece points out education does costs money unless you don’t mind if your state keeps dropping compared to other states.
7
Money made Devos an education expert...
2
@Kyle
You got it and it needs to stop!
Removing the communal aspect of education and putting each child into the isolation of self-education? What a perfectly wretched concept!
As with everything in this day and age, computers are being misapplied to a group activity and de-personalizing what has historically been a communal experience. Who thought it a good idea to separate these kids into the private universe of their minds, especially at the age they are mentally developing and, just as important, developing their social skills?
Good for these kids that they are rebelling. I no Luddite but I am no brave new world advocate either. As with everything, cyber experiences have their place but not in replacing the institution of community.
4
It doesn’t take much to get what’s going on here: Zuckerberg trying to replace teachers with software, harvesting extremely valuable data (privacy? Spare me) about the educational capacity and propensities of these kids. And the money he will be making. The mendacity of Zuckerberg continues to amaze me.
I wish the writers, however, did a better job of detailing what exactly it is that is triggering the backlash. Maybe it’s me, but something seems to be missing in this story.
14
So who owns all that data finagled from children in the name of learning? Facebook?
And how long before we learn that all that information is available in an unencrypted text file in some open Facebook server?
8
The weird part is we are preparing kids for a world in which they interact with other people. Yet Summit believes the right answer is to reduce that interaction as much as possible. I'm all for "personalized learning" but not at the expense of human interaction.
7
My child goes to one of the Bay Area Summit schools. This article touches upon initial fears we of the older parents possess and lack of exposure. That a link online could lead to unsavory content is a risk we all take when venturing into the online world. It's everywhere, every single day, and a risk with every click. Schools try but can't hide everything; this issue will be a problem even in our own homes. It's like whack-a-mole. To dig deep into the issues, articles like this need to bypass the pervasive problems of parental filtering software and take a look instead at the content of the educational platform and how its delivered. NYT: Take us through a typical day with a typical Summit child, one in middle and one in high school. Show us a child in one of the original Summit school, show us a child in Kansas whose school is piloting the program. Give us context. A parent in Silicon Valley might have a different view of software than those outside the area. I don't view software as the enemy. The contrary, in fact. I also don't see the Summit platform as something that can be rolled out in all districts. I see it as an option, a school of choice that should be in every district. The one big thing that could make a difference at Summit and at every school? Teachers. Even if you have the best program, if you don't have inspiring teachers who are invested in kids and the program, the program won't reach its potential.
4
Where exactly in “Silicon Valley? Not in Palo Alto I bet.
Silicon Valley is at it's core a religious movement (cultish if you like). They have discovered the light and the way. Follow them into the better world. They remind me of the TV preachers - always a profit motive at the heart.
7
If one simply wants to learn facts, then computers are wonderful. But that is not the sole purpose of attending school. Chikdren learn social skills. they share ideas and opinions and learn to compromise and reach collective decisions, as well as facts. Not sure you can do all of that staring at a computer screen
6
Any program of instruction requires dedication by the student, which often requires that the student be instilled with principles of discipline. The lack of parental support and parental discipline, and lack of ability to impose effective discipline in school, is a root cause of disruption and learning issues in schools. For most kids, you can’t leave it up to them to learn or they will fail miserably. Better to face the facts head on.
3
I'm over 50 now and basically grew up with computers from an early age (5th grade on). I can see the obvious mistakes this Summit program is making, as well as the culture clash between religions and between religion and reality.
I personally do not believe that sitting a kid in front of a computer and not communicating with him or her, or having the kids group together and talk to each other, is a good idea. Teachers still have to teach, and kids need collaborate with each other, otherwise the kids have no idea whether they are progressing well in a subject or not. Very few people can make decent progress with self-directed study. Very, very few.
Its even worse for people growing up in rural areas of heavily religious states who don't have a clue about just how localized their faith's teaching are outside of a 100 mile radius. Usually the realization happens when the kids are college bound, not in grade school. These kids in Kansas and their families got the shock of their lives. Teachers can navigate expectations, but computers cannot. A program like this would be more useful in a more progressive state (with some modification), but it's an obvious disaster in a place like Kansas.
-Matt
4
As someone who took an online class my senior year of high school (~5 yrs ago) I can say with certainty that I have avoided all online classes. You do not learn the same way, testing will leave you with either only multiple choice questions or fill in the blanks. Essay questions will become strangely graded or obsolete. In addition, doing all work on a computer means that fine motor skills like hand writing will atrophy. Kids these days are already being inundated with technology and screens outside of school. To make school fully reliant on screens is moving in the wrong direction.
16
The Common Core State Standards, as advocated by Bill Gates and President Obama, received reactions that were every bit as bitter as what I read here. In fact, test scores are down except in areas where the tests have been replaced to reflect the new standards.
So who gets better results, Common Core or the new Zuckerberg effort? And do they get better or worse results than whatever we call what was done before?
As a result of reading about Common Core, I did a study of the current educational mess. I bought every book I could find on the subject, and picked up a Common Core textbook and the pre-Core textbook it replaced to see what was changed. The old textbook was extraordinary only in its dullness. The new textbook was even duller but had more expensive color printing and discussed the "standards".
I was going to write a book showing that the Sudbury Valley school system, where you put students in classrooms and let them figure out what to learn based on their interests, worked best. Alas, only about 75% of students thrive based on this program. About 25% despise it and need structure to thrive.
So my current conclusion is that students should choose the school that looks best for them, based on vouchers similar to those proposed by Milton Friedman et al. I think that's the only way to improve education for all pupils. One size fits all, whether Common Core or Zuckerberg, just doesn't work.
7
While computer programs may be useful helping students to learn some basic grammatical skills and maybe even memorizing dates, a computer program or even an online "classroom" environment has not proven effective in helping them develop more complex writing skills or understanding the impact of major, let alone minor, historical events. With thirty years of experience teaching in post-secondary environments, I have yet to see any evidence that any of the humanities can be properly taught electronically in a meaningful way for the students. Indeed, separating students from teachers through electronic media speaks volumes about the apparent alienation of our young people. Documented increased rates in depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, and insomnia in our youth may be a direct result of their "screen-induced" isolation from the rest of humanity.
8
I am a retired elementary teacher. I had a smartboard in my room and used it no more than ten or fifteen minutes a day to enhance visual learning. I fear education is becoming robotized, and soon robots will be in the classroom. Personalized learning is when you partner students to work on problem solving, or work with students face to face in small groups, or one on one with teachers using books, books, books. I wish schools would ban learning from iPads, if not, soon we will give birth to babies with screens for faces.
7
@Juliana James
Not so fast... they just need some time and data so they can tweak the algorithms.
Hahaha...
The problem with computer scientists is that they imagine they can reinvent things they don't really understand. Too bad such experiments are done on entire generations of children. Increasingly pervasive automation is the hallmark of cheaply run public schools, and is likely to inversely correlate with quality education.
As it has probably been pointed out, wealthy and educated people -- especially technically literate parents like the Zuckerbergs -- know better than to let their children go through public schools where paper and pencil are replaced by tablets instruction is done by software.
12
The appeal of programs like Summit is the cost, and this is most especially appealing to communities where educational spending is anathema.
Kansas has been serving as a Petri dish for many tax reduction ideas, using its residents as lab rats without much concern for the consequences.
It is telling when a dentist - who might be less concerned about taxes for the education of his children in a different time and place - notes that the lure of Summit was its zero cost. He should know better.
Unlike some other community systems, primary education is available to residents only in childhood.
Perhaps it is ill-suited for this kind of experimentation - where a product with little documented success is used to show how disruption can change the world.
Kudos to young Kansans and their families for recognizing that they need to raise their voices to overcome decisions made because of agendas that don't have their best interests in mind.
12
My take on this is that it reduces the reliance upon, and influence of, “human” teachers — really, a cost-cutting program.
14
The best learning systems would include a variety of means from technology and group experiments to lectures and individual work. Individuals learn differently, so one size does not fit all.
It sounds like Summit Learning was adopted because it seemed easy and fast, never good reasons.
2
The driving force, besides profit, was identified towards the end of the article. The program requires a lot of personal data and they (Summit) plan on following the kids to (through?) college.
I am sick of IT companies and there hype. I have been involved with several projects with IT companies and they overpromise and underdeliver. Same is true of most of the other private sector consulting firms i have had yo work with.
I guess that makes me nostalgic.
8
@Renegator
No, it makes you smart. I hate that so many young people don't get it. They think this stuff is actually good for them and will make life better. It won't.
2
Two glaring problems come through: By turning the classroom into a self directed computer lab with an ancillary teacher standing by, students are losing a great deal of spoken interaction with the teacher and peers. A great deal of significant brain activity occurs in speaking about academic matters with a teacher - it's an important element of verbal intelligence. Secondly, in a nation with a huge number of unfit and overweight children and teens, the stillness required to work at a computer is the exact opposite of the movement our young people need for healthy metabolism.
30
These rural areas of Kansas have overwhelmingly voted for hard right people to represent them for many years. Now their schools are in a crisis. Why can't they reconcile this with their voting behavior?
12
@Bompa Who will these children vote for?
Summit is an example of trying to solve a problem with little or no investment in quality education.
We should consider what other countries around the world have done in the area of developing effective teaching practices.
For example, Finland and other countries manage to get to the top of world student achievement lists year after year. By the end of the second grade all Australian school children become proficient English readers regardless of what language is spoken in the family. No need to invent a wheel - just borrow and adapt what is already in existence and had been demonstrated to work very effectively and, at the end, efficiently.
Yes, it is expensive (teachers there are well-educated and well-paid) and requires a concerted effort on the part of the entire society because we all should finally realize that education is fundamental for the overall health of the the nation. That is how teachers become accountable, respected and fairly compensated.
And we should also keep in mind that it is no coincidence that, along with other factors, great education systems consistently propel the same countries to the top of happiness and well-being lists.
20
The school district I taught in New Jersey (Springfield) rolled out one on one laptops for all fifth through 12th grade students about 18 years ago. Immediately, I saw that kids stopped interacting with one another. Even in homeroom, the ten minutes of "free time" were consumed with being on that screen and not talking with classmates (same with lunch and recess time). It scared me and I spoke up to no avail.
Of course, technology is important, and we should include it in our lessons, where appropriate. But, solely using the internet will not reach the "whole child" (spirit, mind and body) or students' individual learning styles. Independent studies on this type of learning approach need to take place immediately.
19
Would these Kansas parents be happier paying the taxes necessary to fund good schools with traditional teachers?
9
Sort of glad this prompted one parent to consider education more important than a kitchen remodel and a vacation!
6
Personally, I believe education only happens effectively with a mix of sources and environments: classrooms, libraries, peer based, real-life experience, and on-line. Parental support is also important with youth. Intense learning such as that which we expect from students in K-12 as well as college requires a constant and persistent blend of all these forms in order to be optimally successful.
Any program that relies strictly on one source is a fraud. Yes, you will inevitably learn “something”, but that’s not an adequate goal.
5
Why not at least replace textbooks with iPads ?
2
Because reading real books helps students retain content better, and is much better for their eyes.
3
@Cal: You might want to look at the research showing the negative consequences of screen time on still developing brains.
2
Why not replace our government with AI. It can only be better.
1
In one corner, we have LeBron James and his education initiative. The other we have Zuckerberg. A stark contrast in my opinion... And I think LeBron is producing better results (so far). His model should be more widespread unlike Zuckerberg's solution to solve the American education crisis with technology (which frankly seems to be what many education advocates support... Laptop for every child )
7
My daughter loves math and regularly uses online Khan Academy to learn things beyond the class or to help when she is stuck on something. It has been an excellent resource. She has had some great teachers but this year her math teacher is terrible. Online resources have been crucial this year to make up for the teacher’s inability to explain or teach geometry.
12
@Alexandra Hamilton
This is an appropriate role for online learning.
The real solution will be to replace the math teacher.
13
What I have understood from this article and various comments is that the use of online learning in schools is basically an experiment. No one knows for sure what the long term effects are going to be on the test subjects. Since that is the case, it seems only fair that the first guinea pigs for this experiment be the children of those advocating for it.
Make the extensive use of online learning mandatory in all public and private schools in Silicon Valley and nearby areas first. Gradually extend this requirement to other cities that are tech hubs. Study the effects on the children in those areas for several years and decide whether to extend it to other parts of the country.
7
@A Cynic
The parents of Silicon Valley understand this technology better than anyone and my understanding is that they don't allow their own children much "on-line" time. They're happy to let your kids do it though.
2
I am a cognitive psychologist with 30 years of teaching experience.
The social, emotional, and physical aspects of learning are not separable from the cognitive aspects. Assuming that "learning" can proceed apart from them results in a worthless -- in fact, potentially damaging--- approach to education, especially for the youngest children.
22
20 years ago I asked my then ten year old son why he wasn’t studying harder in school. He pulled out his cellphone and said “Why should I study? If I need to know anything I’ll just use this”.
Seems like the idea has caught on.
6
When and if my child says that, I will relieve him of his cellphone PRIVILEGES for one week. The next offense will be two weeks, and so on.
7
Twenty years ago, cellphones were not capable of telling us everything. They were barely mainstream.
4
Your ten year old son had his own cell phone in 1999? Sure...
2
So why is it all or nothing? Why not let it be either optional or used selectively for certain parts of the curriculum. Is the coal to merely turn public schools into a computer lab?
1
It would have been far, far better if Zuckerberg would have just offered money for books, teachers, teaching assistants and funds for building new and modern facilities that the community could chose for itself. Think of how many qualified and wonderful teachers could have been hired and how many young lives could have been changed. Money for college education and also training for blue collar jobs and careers could also have been offered.
Now we have the Zuckerberg agenda and Zuckerberg "think" imposing itself on young people and a community. May as well be Mao Tse Tung and the Chinese Communist Party.
So, what McPherson, Kansas now has is upset students, parents and no real improvement in education. No one really benefits except the Zuckerbergs and their personal agenda.
Did Zuckerberg even think of how to really help students? Did he ask the community members and students what they believed they needed? No. He didn't.
Life and preparation for life is not a laptop computer and bunch of self-help computer applications. Computer engineers are not needed to design methods and curriculum for education.
There is a great lack of human interaction and community participation in the Summit program. Education should be for the students not for Silicon Valley and Zuckerberg's distorted, misguided views. Zuckerberg forgot about the human element in education. He forgot about the voices of everyone else. Sorry Zuckerberg. You don't know best.
17
@Jay
What! Zuckerberg pay for books? Books made of paper? Never will happen. But I bet his own children will have them.
2
When I was in elementary school in the mid 60's we were given math packets that you complete at your own speed and check yourself. For me it did not work. I needed more structure and more teacher input. In the end I had to take remedial math in high school. Not everyone is suited to "learn at your own pace".
9
"John Pane, a senior scientist at the RAND Corporation who has studied programs that use digital tools to customize learning, said the field remains in its infancy. “There has not been enough research,” he said."
Umm, this is exactly what they're doing in Kansas, and the test results, excuse me, experiment results are coming back negative. It is so typical of the RAND Corporation to invert the public perception to do damage control, and as a progressive liberal, I will be among the first to say this is a psychosomatic response these children's bodies are having to the neoliberal silicon order to being molded like a memory chip.
I stand with Kansas.
7
I would be interested in learning what the actual learning activities were in some detail.
As an educator myself I know that without proper preparation many classroom innovations go quickly off kilter. Often named "best practices," these innovations are generally something that worked amazingly well for one teacher because of his or her own artistry or genius. Such practices, though, don't always fare so well with other teachers because they didn't invent them and aren't in the same circumstances that gave rise to them.
I wonder what faculty input was to the adoption of this system.
6
I am surprised at the automatic assumption that Zuckerberg’s motives must be evil. Everyone does sound a bit like Luddites. Clearly this system needs work but the basic idea is not that bad. The system actually ought to provide time and budget savings enough to reintroduce arts, music, and meaningful real world socially positive programming into the schools. It also gives kids with a broad range of abilities some customized teaching that is not provided in understaffed over crowded public school classrooms where only the worst or the very best get individual attention because the rest are doing “ok” and can be safely ignored by the overwhelmed teachers.
8
@Alexandra Hamilton
"I am surprised at the automatic assumption that Zuckerberg’s motives must be evil."
There is plenty of real world evidence that Facebook deliberately flouts the law, and lies to the public as well as government about what they are doing.
It is only prudent to question their motives with a project like this.
9
There seems to be a lot of health and well-being issues for people who spend so much time focusing on electronic screens.
I’m pretty sure these kids would be better off during school hours, interacting with their fellow humans.
8
Teaching is about interpersonal relationships - between students and teachers, and students and classmates. That's why small class sizes are ideal. An essential part of learning is feeling motivated to learn and to achieve, and those things are essentially social. A classroom thrives when it functions with a positive community dynamic. It's about face-to-face interaction. Friendly competition between students, and a student's desire to impress their teacher, are motivating forces. Somehow Silicon Valley doesn't recognize this and keeps inserting screens and software between students and teachers. Then again, they seem to get it when it comes to their own children.
8
So if the students are given links to related articles on the internet (like the Daily Mail for paleolithic studies) where in this Summit program do they teach the students how to discriminate between reliable and unreliable sources for different kinds of information?
15
I think "paleolithic" and "Daily Mail" go together quite well.
2
Would have liked to know more about the educational approach and implementation of the online learning.
I've had some terrible instructors in my life–more concerned with order than discussion, or were just as married to a text book as a computer is to a standardized workflow.
That being said, collaborative, interpersonal learning is really important and online learning platforms often miss that. But interpersonal communication is part of being human and later in jobs being able to communicate and work together. It sounds like Summit didn't have a good collaborative process.
Online platforms take away busy work in lesson planning–photo copying worksheets and collation, compiling and printing research, purchasing textbooks, grading multiple-choice tests. Teachers still should be doing lesson plans and presenting information in group settings, facilitating group discussions, and moderating projects. A mixed approach and the human and group interaction is so important to learning.
Another missed out aspect in tech, and largely in education as a whole, is the accommodation with people who have different learning needs. In some cases, tech might be helpful. I know students who've used computers to mitigate hand-eye coordination issues that made their handwriting illegible (something that teachers often punish). In some cases it isn't. Having contingency plans and an awareness that these platforms cannot be standardized to all human conditions should be planned for.
4
As an educator who uses chromebooks as a creative writing tool for students, I just want to point out that technology per se is not the enemy; technology only becomes a problem when what students DO with that technology becomes prescribed from the outside with no input from the educator in the room.
I agree, canned online “programs” that “teach” math and reading skills, then report student “scores” to teachers, are highly nefarious, and are a badly disguised attempt to make educated teachers irrelevant (thus justifying the elimination of their positions), or at least reducing their compensation.
However, for a teacher to be able to guide student writing and suggest edits for their work without the mess of sorting through reams of paper and without that ever-present obstacle of producing “neat” handwriting, makes the act of writing, in my view, much easier, much less of a chore, and much more enjoyable.
8
In communities where cooperation is requisite for survival, and where isolation is more common that wheat, the last thing schools need to embrace is more "screen time" for young people, whatever the justification.
But when Silicon Valley knocks at your door offering "free" "improvements" to your educational curriculum, skepticism - if not downright terror - is absolutely the correct response. The motivations of capitalism are not altruistic. Here they are more akin to a zombie flick: think "We want your brains..."
As an educator, I have seen a number of software packages for schools. They vary in quality, but they all have a common problem. They encourage children to rely even more on a screen for information - implying that this is "better" than human interaction, books, paper and pen(cil), etc. and that the "truth" can only be found with computer technology.
As we have seen - over and over and over (ad nauseum) - nothing is further from the Truth than the Internet.
5
@E Squared
I am all for interaction, but books, papers and pencils are better replaced with iPads (or the equivalent). I like the concept of a teacher providing links to information available on the internet.
I find it greatly disappointing, although not at all surprising, that most responses to this article are either tired partisan attacks against Republicans, strawman defenses against fictional attacks on teachers, or attacks on Zuckerberg personally. Wouldn’t it have been refreshing if they instead had acknowledged the stated criticisms of the program, skeptically evaluated those criticisms, open-mindedly considered the possible advantages of the program, and recommended how it might be changed in a way increase those benefits while minimizing any shortcomings?!
My daughter attended a public high school that did not offer advanced science courses that she wanted, and so took an online AP Physics course offered by Johns Hopkins University. The program was incredible! It was structured around a teacher/presenter who was engaging/enthusiastic and made the entire subject matter very interesting, unlike many science teachers I had when a student. And by utilizing the potential of the electronic media, they were able to instantly and effectively intersperse graphics, animations and film clips of real-world applications of the concept (projectile motion) being taught. I am convinced that this is the perfect way to teach certain subjects, particularly science. Use the most engaging presenter to present, supplement with visuals as useful, and let the local teacher be the (invaluable) resource to answer questions, clear up confusion, and stimulate further discussion/exploration.
12
First of all, I have to assume that your daughter had a strong background knowdge in the subject. One would be foolish to think that passing an AP class without necessary background knowledge is actually possible. Online learning has its own limitations, it can produce positive outcomes when the learner actually has the necessary knowdge to build on. Secondly, as a middle school teacher (math) I can tell you that not a lot of students can learn a NEW topic such as solving equations (that happens to be a MAJOR topic in middle school) on their own, especially if they do not know the concept of variables. Students need to be able to ask questions when learning new material. Abstract concepts are especially challenging. That’s why computers don’t work. And that’s probably the reason this whole “experiment” did not work in Kansas. Computers can accomplish many tasks, but they cannot replace a human teacher in the early years of learning. Unfortunately, I’ve been seeing this push for more technology in the classroom for some years now. I am sad to say that, although with some benefits, technology is not the way to educate our children. It can only make learning more engaging when paired with a good teacher. I also wonder how other countries such as Finland (since we are always compared to them) are using technology knowing that teachers are highly regarded and fairly paid there. Don’t you think they would be putting their kids in front of Chromebooks if that was the best way to go?
5
@Visitor
First, I greatly appreciate your thoughtful response. It was refreshing to read a reply to a NYT column that actually was based upon objective thinking rather than emotional vitriol.
Second, you shared that you were a middle school teacher, so I readily accept that you have had experience with many more students than I have. But you never suggested that this meant that I or others should completely defer to your opinion. I respect that. It has been an observation throughout my career that actual experience is important but that great new ideas can come from people without that experience. And failing to recognize that fact limits the generation and appropriate consideration of such ideas.
Third, I also thought that you made good points. Due to my one first-hand experience, I remain convinced of the enormous advantages and benefits of using online/video teaching for certain subjects, particularly those (eg physics) that can too often seem baffling, boring and entirely pointless to students when taught by a classroom teacher. However, I do accept your view that there are other courses (such as english) where online/video lectures may not be advantageous. But notwithstanding that you are a math teacher, I (as someone who took approximately 15 math courses in high school and college) still can see areas where the online/video math lectures would be very beneficial.
Lastly, I do view the local teacher to be invaluable, even when online/video lectures are used.
It sounds like a great idea that needs some modifications to work in the real world. Clearly the students need more time away from the screen doing different kinds of school/learning activities. But since it is brand new and the Kansas schools were clearly an early testing phase it shouldn’t surprise anyone that there are problems that need to be solved. It’s hard on the student guinea pigs but on the other hand you have to test new approaches out in the real world and the Kansas schools were so bad really anything was an improvement so it’s hard to say the students’ education was harmed.
3
This spirit of "innovation" is not new. How many people remember Chris Whittle's "Channel One" back in the 1990s? I did my student teaching in 1996 in a large urban high school in Texas that had accepted Channel One's gift of "free" TVs and closed-circuit servers (cutting edge at the time) for the Faustian bargain of students' having to watch Channel One at the beginning of second period every day. I would sit there somewhat patiently on my stool in front of the yet unused blackboard as the TV mounted above the blackboard would turn on automatically, whereupon the students would turn away from the TV and chat amongst themselves while ads for Mountain Dew and Taco Bell (served in the cafeteria, by the way) blasted their way through that "free" equipment. Where is Channel One today? (Hint -- it's defunct.) What's Chris Whittle doing these days? Whose lives were changed meaningfully by Channel One? (Hint -- the investors' and the on-air talents' [cf. Lisa Ling, et al.], not the students'.)
4
The collapse of the Roman, Byzantine...etc empires were noted for the opulent palaces of the aristocracy which became grander and grander, just before the end.
2
And the end finally came when the richest of the rich realized that government had become expendable. To them. Because if you're rich enough, you can grow your own food, hire your own armies, barter for the things you can't produce yourself, and dispense your own justice.
Parents with only a minimal understanding of the Summit program, over-looked students with special needs, school districts jumping on the Summit bandwagon as a means to reduce teaching staff, and privacy concerns can all sink an otherwise promising innovation.
Communication was key and it sounds like something was missing.
1
What could possibly go wrong? Why, it's just like home schooling.
But with a robot.
It certainly seems logical, does it not, that this comes from the mind of Zuckerberg, who saw no problems with his social media platform until Congress started calling him in for detention.
7
Human interaction has become something that only rich people can afford, whether it be in teaching, medicine, or customer service.
4
Self directed "learning " by students was tried back in the late 1960's in Ontario. Students where expected to study only those subjects that interested them. Consequences where that when those Students entered High school they where completely lost when an actual Formatted Learning Program was presented to them. This mini-disaster ,perpetrated by the Do-Gooders at the Ministry of Education, was dropped & schools returned to traditional Teacher led learning . A system that has worked brillantly for the last 3 thousand years in the West .
3
Zuckerberg and Bill Gates have no business interfering in education. Putting kids in front of a screen all day is terrible. A huge part of school is learning to interact with other human beings, both in class and on the playground. I’m so sorry for these kids who have essentially been abandoned by the state.
9
Apparently Zuckerberg doesn't know the difference between teaching and programming.
Fortunately, these kids and their parents do.
13
Good schools start and end with good parenting. Successful schools, teachers, and students follow. Some "app" will not fixed that - this is simply another attempt by Silicon Valley to profile your kids to sell them some garbage in the future.
5
The ?? in chief will tell you in his best words : fake news, fake science, fake expertise, fake knowledge, fake everything. Why should we spend money on schools?
2
I have no children in school, am hardly a Luddite, so have no axe to grind on this issue. With that said, I have the following comments/concerns:
1) I agree with some commenters that this article is comprised primarily of anecdotes. And as the article states, not enough research has been done on the use of digital tools in schools. However, these anecdotes are troubling and IMO should not be written off as group hysteria as other commenters have mentioned. It is quite telling that Summit chose to not be part of the Harvard study that it helped pay for, and that the Harvard professor was afraid to speak out against Summit due to concerns about funding. Our education system is not immune to corrupting monetary influence. Therefore, I believe that these students were abused as guinea pigs.
2) The arrogance and ignorance displayed by at least some of representatives of Summit are astounding. E.g. Someone stupid enough to call a rag such as the Daily Mail “fair game for lesson plans” not only has no business being involved in the education of children, but should be held suspect for anything coming out of his or her mouth. And to make a blanket statement that the parents “don’t want change” is absurd and false- they initially welcomed Summit until things started going awry.
3) IMO these students were abused as human guinea pigs
8
@acj
Bravo!
1
You can bet that this "bot learning" platform somehow would find its way onto Facebook in order to control discussions according to the terms that an advertiser contracted for.
5
Isn't it enough that the kids are staring at screens when they're not in class? Add a school day like Summit's, and the kids are in front of screens almost all their waking moments.
5
This is all about a society's allocation of resources based upon it's values and priorities. Anti-tax America is getting what it pays for--and it's showing that quality public education is a low priority. Let's see how well that works out over the coming decades. Teaching is, and always has been, an art -- which is why teaching is a profession like, lawyering, doctoring and other fields that require training, judgment, skill and strong ethics. This can't be done on the cheap, folks. These kids are being robbed of important tools and experiences. I'll take my high-tax New York. If you can make it here you can make it anywhere!
9
In my first year of teaching, 1973, the middle school where I taught in suburban Indianapolis used a similar "self-paced" program in the math department. Come in, grab a folder (old-school, when paper folders preceded electronic folders on Chromebooks), take the appropriate "pre-test", have it scored, be assigned certain worksheets to address your "deficiencies in understanding", try to stay awake while working through them and waiting for the teacher to finish giving quick help to classmates so you can get your two-minute-long turn, take the "post-test", try not to scream at the boredom of it all and pray for the bell to end the class. Come back tomorrow and repeat. It was mind-numbing insanity then. It's mind-numbing insanity now. No one learns anything. And everyone hates what they do day after day.
There, alternatively, is a valid solution to the problems we have in our education system:
Hire (and pay) good, energetic teachers and give them four or five classes of 20-22 students, have these include only two "preps" so they can plan imaginatively and well and then let them know that the school has expectations for its teachers and those teachers should have expectations for their students - but everyone is in the game to help each other. And finally - don't go anywhere near Mark Zuckerberg and his ilk.
9
Some of the main things I remember from kindergarten through graduate school are the personal stories teachers told in the classroom. I learned a great deal about compassion, empathy, history the teachers lived through, places they lived around the world, books they loved the most, and on and on.
I had a teacher tell us what he went through on the Frozen Chosen during the Korean War. He had tears in his eyes and and shocked look on his face as he recounted that. Can a computer do that? What happens to discussions, debates, listening skills, even jokes when you work alone at a computer? What about sharing?
7
This article made clear that many students and parents don't like Summit but does little to explain what bothers them about it. Is it the amount of screen time needed? The content of the courses? The interface? The move away from learning from books, teachers and other students? Something else? Is it the whole move towards making students sit quietly in front of a screen and changing teachers into monitors? There are some specific concerns by individuals but nothing mentioned that sounds bad enough to generate this much negativity. We still don't have much of a clue.
At the same time, it's very disconcerting to see a Summit professional dismiss the rebels as ignorant Luddites. You start with where your students are, not where you've decided they should be. If you insist that you have nothing to learn from your core clients, you're headed for extinction.
I worked with post high school students teaching vocational education. Good educational software is a great asset, but it can't replace a good teacher. Education isn't just about learning content, it's about learning how to think, how to connect ideas and concepts, how to talk to and learn from others. For most subjects, most of us need a mix of guidance and self-direction.
13
Don't forget to cross reference: An earlier NYT article cites the fact that Silicon Valley families restrict screen time, favoring Montessori and other hands-on, socially constructed learning models.
15
@PRL Exactly right. And as the parent of a recent graduate of a top Silicon Valley public high school, I can attest that the education model was nothing like Summit. In fact, one teacher had a flipped classroom, where the students watched the teacher's lecture online so class time could be used for discussion, group work, questions and what would otherwise be homework.
Students need MORE interaction with others, not less.
6
What's missing here, in a lengthy article, is any mention whatsoever of the devastating impact of Gov. Sam Brownback's slash-and-burn budget cuts over the last years. Context, please. Nobody did this just because it sounded like a good idea. They did it because the educational system in their state was starved by rabid Republican ideological attacks on all things public.
14
More than basic skills like addition and reading, education imparts values and mindsets. When a student is having trouble making out a word on a page or adding a series of numbers, it’s the human teacher who pauses the task at hand to tell a story with a moral at the end, drop some wisdom about persistence, or share a strategy for dealing with frustration. Computers can’t translate the joy of reading or problem-solving, especially for young minds who lack context. Good teachers situate academic skills in a larger socio-emotional field and help young learners feel connected to what they’re learning so they stay the course.
5
I'm trying to imagine a life free of computers. It's impossible. Even a trip to McDonald's in Kansas requires interaction with a computer. This is clearly a case of poorly designed SW being beta tested on children. Shame on SV for thinking it tackle any problem with an app designed by recent graduates with no educational background.
1
@Nick R- we'd be back to the 1950s, still a post-agrarian industrial society and economy, all very workable, with a high rate of employment and skilled labor. And one of our best periods as a culture.
You can bet that Zuckerberg and Chan's children don't use this program. Interesting how reports from Silicon Valley indicate that growing numbers of that area's elites strictly limit their children's screen time, particularly when very young, if they let them use tablets or phones at all.
What other industry makes billions of dollars but won't let their children use the products they aggressively sell to public schools? That's very disturbing and right in line with Zuckerberg's and Chan's delusional view of the future. Stated safely from their armed fortress of a house.
Mentoring is an important part of teaching. But it is only one part of being a teacher and the most important part is actively teaching, not monitoring computer use. Sincerely doubt there is one teacher who got into teaching to do that and this will further erode the numbers of people who want to teach.
We need them, not good intentions and nothing else from an industry that seems to do as much harm as good these days.
6
Seems kinda self defeating to try anything new and possibly an innovative approach to education which is sorely needed and might evolve with experience:
In an area of the country mostly known for insularity and intolerance of most things progressive.
UNLESS you want to work out the kinks with the dimmer bulbs in the room?
Most sharp kids with supportive parents will probably take to this system like fish to water.
Leave them more time outs for arts and recreation.
2
I teach 5th grade in LAUSD. We adopted Benchmark's online ELA program two years ago. It has been a learning curve for everyone. It is no surprise that students don't like evaluating, synthesizing, and analysis thinking and typing paragraphs that prove they are doing that. The fact is though, technology is not going away. Helping students learn keyboard skills, prepare for college, and develop 21st century skills is doing our students a favor.
4
Good for the protestors!
This screen-immersion learning destroys attention spans and social skills and spurs intense anxiety. As many articles in the Times have pointed out, leaders in the tech industry send their own kids to tech free schools and keep their kids' screen time very limited; as the designers of these hypnotic products, they know better than anyone what they do to developing brains.
The anxiety that tech-based learning spurs is partly because it is immersed in and has ubiquitous links to what this article calls the "open internet," where one is constantly bombarded with sketchy distracting advertisements and links to fraudulent or disgusting content. Constantly scrolling, skimming, and switching pages destroys one's "deep reading" skills, as anyone who transitions to a real book after several hours on the internet knows. Also, one is constantly aware on some level that every click is being tracked to build a profile that is being sold to advertisers.
Kids who are immersed in screens are being robbed of a childhood. The greatest thing about childhood is being able to look out a window with a mind that is completely free to roam and imagine; now kids don't stare out car windows and dream, they are boxed into a tiny sickening world of screens and the anxiety that characterizes adulthood is heaped upon them.
This is Zuckerberg's charitable giving in action: charity that gets the ball rolling on products from which he will profit.
7
@Cody I think of this comment as the problem with such an outrage based approach to thinking about learning. Careful evaluation of advantages and disadvantages of self paced learning are potentially of use to all of us. Self-puffed outrage statements from those who have already made up their minds and need no further sleuthing (like the above comment) are of little use.
2
@WHM, what you say might be perfectly OK, so long is it didn't take the teachers out of the equation like it did in these Kansas towns.
Ah, yes, take the teachers out of teaching. Who needs 'em in the wonderful new age of robotics and A (not so much) I.
Besides, you've got those annoying questions of adequate salaries, health insurance, etc. And those summers off! (especially now when all the crops are being harvested by robots or the undocumented).
Yeah, Zuckerberg's idea of what constitutes effective education is definitely the way to go. Who would know more about it than the guy who refined a college level dating site?
Conscientious ignorance takes so many forms; it's hard to keep up.
3
@crowdancer This comment is not really relevant to the article. Certainly there are remotely connected questions, such as how much our society values its teachers, and whether the frequent demonization of teachers is warranted. However, I felt that the article was also about whether computer based self paced teaching has a role in educating children, and we can discuss that issue independent of the assault of for profit methods on our public education system.
1
Not relevant? It's the entire agenda of Kansas voters: to punish suspected liberals by starving the institutions that hire them.
Reading this article, it looks to me like "Mr. Zuckerberg and Dr. Chan’s philanthropic organization, the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative," has less to do with philanthropy than it has to do with cornering additional (and potentially vast) profits in the Digital Wonderland. Deja vu all over again?
Not that there isn't a real need for better education in America. For example, after all the lies from Facebook, how could anyone believe Mr. Zuckerberg, especially when the issue is their kids' futures? From corporate America's perspective, the real appeal of web-based curriculums is all about maintaining absolute control over curriculums, collecting reams of personal data on students, and of course MAKING MONEY, always making money. (Note that "investing in America's future" isn't on that list.)
7
@RR
There is tons more information, and in far greater depth, on the internet than can ever be published in a text book. Textbooks are vestiges of the past, somewhat like using a horse drawn plow vs modern farm equipment.
Learning does not have to be isolated in order to take advantage of online materials, however.
From time immemorial human beings have learned from other humans. - including more experienced “elders” (now called teachers) - and from the physical environment itself. Computer-based learning (CBT) has consistently failed to meet expectations in just about every form and environment it has been applied on.
The model assumes that humans learn in isolation and that all humans have the same learning style. It emphasizes “facts” vs knowledge or wisdom and fails to take into account the social and emotional dimensions of learning.
School has always been the crucible for encountering people who were raised differently, learning to be part of a community, finding ways of getting what you need in an unknown environment and getting ahead or just keeping up within new authority structures.
How can a screen and cyber tokens replace a star or an “A” from a teacher you respect or getting on the kick ball team with the cool kids? And why on earth is it considered desirable that children take charge of their own learning and responsibility for outcomes? That’s what parents and teachers are for.
4
I’m not cynical by nature. But a BIG RED FLAG popped up in my mind when I read about the ads that the kids were exposed to when they clicked on the link to The Daily Mail.
I am proficient in technology, I’m by no means an expert. Yet I rarely see ads while online. That’s because I use the most basic of devices called ad blockers. I’m sure that Zuckerberg knows about these and how to incorporate them into an online educational program. But that he chooses not to makes me highly suspicious (regardless of any real desire to help our schools) of what the real end game is here.
8
I was in a public school district and the best experiences I had in the classroom distinctly didn't involve chromebooks. For all the hysteria on phones in classrooms, the chromebook offers what felt essentially like the same experience. There are important lessons that come from social learning and social solidarity, these proprietary programs are only interested in profit, and eventually monopoly. They don't work, and they further alienate us from our peers.
2
It might be worth considering that Sumner and McPherson Counties, where Wellington and McPherson are located, vote solidly Republican. The loss of funding to their schools is thus partly a consequence of their support for Governor Brownback (in 2010 & 2014), would-be governor Kobach (in 2018), and their Republican cronies in the Legislature who were (and probably remain) determined to eliminate personal taxes and thorough that any semblance of a robust system of public education in Kansas. I feel for them, especially the children. But I also wish they'd wake up.
13
Facebook damaged Western Democracy with an “oops, my bad” and we think to trust them with educating children? No thanks.
I can see how a Summit curriculum for an obscure field for a student with a specific interest might be valuable, especially in a more rural area without other options (eg classes at a community college). Interested in ancient Japanese history and don’t have a teacher with that expertise? Okay, here’s an elective learning unit. Need more practice with chemistry? Ok, here’s some extra work.
But putting kids in front of screens all day is a terrible idea.
9
Lets try the Zuckerberg's software in all the public schools in Park Slope, Carroll Gardens, Brooklyn Heights, and the Upper West Side, and then write an article about the wonderful teaching experience using the software.
13
Just because the “Easy” button is so super cool, doesn’t mean it’s any different than any other a tool. A hammer is just a hammer; it’s not the house. We’re fawning over tools rather than focusing on what we want to build.
We should be investing in our public schools, investing in our teachers, investing in our children. There’s a reason why these software programs are “free” and it’s not to benefit our kids or our community.
If Zuckerberg wants to help our kids, he should stop taking corporate welfare (which we subsidize), pay his full way in taxes (he and his company), so our public schools can get the full funding they need.
He can keep his “free” tools and the shiny gold star he thinks he gets for how noble he is. If he paid his full share of taxes (and his other corporate-welfare-receiving buddies paid their full shares as well), our public schools wouldn’t need his cheap, easy, self-serving pseudo solutions to our public education system.
15
Kids don’t learn this way. They’re social animals; that’s why Socrates taught a CLASS. Tell Zuck to stay out of my pocket. No tax dollars for tech scams like Summit.
15
This is about data collection and making an entire generation completely dependent on screens/devices. Be wary of anything that Mark Zuckerberg or anyone else from Silicon Valley is offering for “free.”
5
in response to Al in San Jose
@Al
I think you've identified the attack force inside the wooden horse - now disguised as chrome-books.
This is about data collection for future tracking.
This is about preventing a generation of children from developing critical thinking skills through dialogue.
This is about fragmenting communities and social ties.
This is about creating a generation of empty-minded peons who obey the directions of social media platform diatribes from political factions.
This is disgusting and very dangerous.
And of course this is happening in Kansas, home of Kris Koback and the anti-tax tea party libertarians.
8
This dates all the way back to the Blackwater funded charter school takeover. Perhaps the roots are even earlier, with the development of the 'field' of education. The goal was to remove a unionized labor force. Secondary school Teachers of the 20th century used to have degrees in their field, and the state would set educational requirements on the recommendation of university faculty. All tests were written by teachers. American education was top notch.
Now we have astoundingly ignorant people with degrees in 'teaching, ' bloated school administrations overseeing their minimum wage flunkys and our curriculum set by... well who, exactly? Who creates our current learning methods and standards? We used to have annual curricula printed that outlined how classrooms met state standards and that was more than enough. The only reason to write reams of pages for every lesson, daily, is to allow intellectual property theft.
If you dont believe me then where are the giants of this so-called field of education weighing in? Why is no scientific method applied? Why are the professionals, which would be teachers, not the ultimate voice in what methods are to be used?
We as a society handed education to a bunch of money grabbing corrupt buffoons. Anyone who isn't concerned by this cultural shift, with proven negative results, needs to be reminded that an democracy cannot function with an ignorant population.
8
Makes perfect sense. An anti-social learning system created by an anti-social network company run by a creepy dude who does creepy things with your private information while living in fortress-like mansions and remote island getaways.
8
Maybe we need a remake of The Music Man and his work in River City.
Mr. Zuckerberg is well known for exploiting the privacy of its mostly (lemming) users for $$$. Now with the tantalizing prospect of such exploitation from cradle to the grave, the dollar signs in Mr. Zuckerberg eyes must be glowing brightly.
3
You learn by interaction with others not spending more hours disconnected from your peers. Interestingly, at tech companies they employ team strategy sessions to enhance better ideas for new products. For healthy, happy and productive humane beings we need social settings for learning and especially for developing young minds and bodies. They used these-vulnerable and disadvantaged kids as guinea pigs ... shameful.
4
Kansas, leading the way in educational development. Next millennium they might acknowledge the earth is not the center of the universe.
2
The best education runs on love
Love of learning
Love of teaching
Love of caring and sharing
And love of unlocking the genius in each of us
I am an AI developer and our stuff does not do that and will never do it
I am a lucky man
In the Sixties John Rassias at Dartmouth taught me French and there I experienced the love
“ Nothing like the real thing baby.”
3
The McPherson superintendent of schools is quoted as saying:
“Students are becoming self-directed learners and are demonstrating greater ownership of their learning activities.”
What claptrap and doublespeak!
Middle school students will never learn from web-based “personalized learning” by sitting for hours in front of a computer screen.
They will only develop carpal tunnel syndrome and ischial tuberosity bursitis.
What students need is guidance and direction from dedicated, patient and understanding real teachers and a shared classroom experience. This is only possible in a traditional classroom setting.
What Kansas has is a funding problem and turning to free web-based learning is a copout and a disservice to students and their teachers.
3
@Kaellyn You are probably right about the dangers of carpal tunnel syndrome, but I also get the part about how you have made up your mind on some issues that I feel we should all be thinking about. Dismissing Kansas as a laboratory for education seems a bit elitist. They may well have gone for the Summit effort to try to rescue their trashed education system, but they did it and at a large scale. That probably makes this an interesting test of self paced learning, and the many problems (for profit, culture clashes, accompanying traching of teachers) should not blind us to the benefits of what could be observed here.
@WHM-, so, if I get this straight, you want to avoid or just ignore all the politics that has brought about this debacle, and is still furthering that agenda. That's naive.
If this is a test about the program, then it is a very bad one, and an example of
"DON'T DO IT LIKE THIS!!!"
This is shocking and insulting. Everyone knows darn well the Zuckerbergs and all the soulless tech masters of the universe like them would NEVER send their children to a Summit school. Shame on them - their nihilism continues to know no bounds.
And how could have administrators and school boards signed off on a teaching model that turns children into office drones and teachers into hall monitors? Was it really that hard to see how dystopian this was before trying it?
This country is so off the rails...
14
The usual contingent of Luddites and technophobes are out in force in the comments section. Naturally, technology is made out to be a villain, while the human “interaction’ in the classroom is presented as a panacea to all educational problems. But clearly the old-fashioned method of teaching is not working in the US. American students lag behind their peers in Asia and Europe in critical thinking, general knowledge and the ability to process information on their own. So perhaps the problem is not with the computers but with the fearful, ignorant and narrow-minded culture of the students and their families. If a student cannot learn on their own, they cannot learn at all. Summit, as far as I can see, is merely a high-tech version of access to the library. So why should it be anymore problematic than asking students to read books independently and form their own thoughts and ideas? Rather than obsessing over a single student with neurological problems, perhaps we should be asking how these teenagers are going to compete with STEM graduates from countries where technology is embraced rather than feared.
4
the problem is not teaching, it's wealth disparity, which won't be fixed by putting children in front of screens all day
2
But wealth disparity is not going to be fixed in time for these kids to get a decent education. This was at least an attempt.
1
@Mor
Sorry. Sometimes technology is NOT the answer.
Silicon Valley tech "gurus" aren't interested in education per se; they are more interested in data mining, getting rid of brick and mortar schooling, and monetizing our kids, who in turn Google everything and anything, school-related or not - without any critical thinking whatsoever. This is in no way like visiting a library. It's like visiting a dark alley.
Tech-led instead of teacher-led classrooms just allow students to cut corners on their school work so they can carve out more time to play the latest game of Fortnite behind their Chromebook tabs. On a good day they are learning how to push buttons and move things around on a screen, no more use of talent than the skills to navigate a TV remote control. The get bored faster than ever as they no longer do heavy intellectual lifting. They have no patience TO read.
Worse, mental-health issues are growing, exacerbated by ubiquitous technology -- a steep downhill road to cyber-bullying, poor self-esteem, early access to porn, and a warped view of what the world is really like. This generation has become afraid of their own shadows.
We are lagging behind Asia and Europe because parents from those parts of the world value education more and expect their children to respect teachers.
Kansans are right. They now own a lemon.
2
We all wish there was some magic bullet for education, but the truth is the same as it has always been. The magic ingredients are students who come to school ready to learn, and excellent teachers.
4
So here's the really big question:
Do we all want to pay for these kids social welfare, and for the rest of their lives, if they don't get a passable education by 18 because this ed product does not work?
There is a reason there is "not enough research" on the topic of educational software. There has been little or no funding for it. Anybody with half an eye open will ask themselves why that is, perhaps? Most likely because it would get in the way of easily selling a cheap learning product that also include life-long tracking of students and their online behavior, practically from cradle to grave. Most front-line teachers have seen these products work poorly over the last 40 years, but few want to listen to them without some numbers behind their concerns. So they and their concerns are easily dismissed.
Imagine that.
3
No one ever needs to actually meet anyone - even during childhood schoolyears. Embrace "personalized learning!"
Join the Silicon Valley disciples with "personalized marriage, parenthood, retirement, cremation."
3
Since when do computer programmers have an educational background to be teachers? I assume they are not licensed teachers. The best option would be some of both, the traditional teacher and some of online learning.
The other issue is the robots who created the online learning platforms do not understand the health needs of students as evidenced in this article about Megan who has epilepsy and is affected by the screen time.
5
Yikes. Zuckerberg and Chan have two young daughters. If they commit to their own kids using Summit Learning instead of the excellent private schools in Palo Alto, they may convince me that Summit is worth a look. But I doubt it.
14
"The school's love it."
The students and parents hate it.
Wealthy tech millionaires and billionaires will not let their own children get near it, they know better.
But it's good enough for everyone else because they are not rich and their children should just be trained to focus on screens and do as they're told because they don't matter.
13
I think online learning will be great for some, not for others, just as every type of education has proven to be through history. I had to obtain a certificate for my position and was given 45 days to do it. I entered an online program and found it to be an excellent way for me to learn. 44 days later I finished the course, took and passed the exam, and have since been competitive at work against people who learned another (more expensive) way. I prefer to learn online and am making progress toward some course or book or another every single day. It has changed my life. When I was in school I never learned Physics because it wasn't offered at my high school, and by the time I got to college I was too far behind to enter a graded course. But I was able to work on my own and eventually followed a full course of astrophysics at UC Berkeley without anyone even knowing I was there, because I did the whole thing through the computer. So even though I never "took Physics," I know how to calculate the distances from here to stars.
7
@Joe I am happy that online learning helped you. As you pointed out, everyone learns differently. But also bear in mind that you were already older (from what I can gather at least high school age) where as these kids are much younger.
Tech is ONE tool of many to educate a human being.
Humans need humans to learn, grow and challenge themselves and to truly learn empathy and understanding about the human condition. School is not simply about acquiring information and skills.
Humans need extended time to listen deeply to one another and question ideas and perspectives face to face. Only 10 minutes of meeting with other students per week is the most troubling part of this set up.
"While Summit’s program asks schools to commit to having students meet weekly in person with teachers for at least 10 minutes, some children said the sessions lasted around two minutes or did not happen."
3
@Badger Beth
Correction: "only 10 minutes of meeting with teachers per week"
2
Nowhere in this story is a hint of how the rebellious students were faring before the introduction of Summit. Were they doing well? Above the state average? Below? What was the reputation of the school? In comparison to other schools in the community? In the the state? We learn that 77 percent of students in the one district didn't want Summit in the classroom--which proves......what?
Did Summit help any students? Did it hurt any students? Lower test scores? Lower grades? Limit understanding of the material? Affect promotions to the next level? The story doesn't tell us, or even raise those questions.
Is there anything tangible in this article other than anecdotes about children complaining to their parents? Is this the new normal? Unhappy children form a resistance to the way they're taught and coerce their parents into upending it.
What happens when they decide biology lab is gross? Or they find using a keyboard onerous? Or demand only French fries & pasta in the lunchroom? Or when they decide their teacher is too ugly to stand in front of innocent kids? What do they get to resist next?
9
Another information hoovering from Facebook/Zuckerberg, but this time with taxpayers' money. Remember, their business model is based on violating your privacy.
10
I spent almost 40 years working in Hi-tech Silicon Valley and have seen the enthusiasm for technology pushed too far. Computer learning is an enhancement for the learning process, not a replacement. It can help visualize classroom concepts, provide access to curriculum covered in class for offline review, and provide information beyond the classroom for those interested. It cannot and should not replace the human interaction of the classroom. Silicon Valleyites live in a world permeated by the computer, most people do not.
7
I wish there had been more discussion on the impact of Kansas' tax policies on the choice to participate in the Summit program. For school districts low on funding, perhaps it seemed like a good idea. And if the result is privatizing education (since people are pulling their kids to send them to private school), maybe it ends up achieving what Gov Brownback intended all along.
4
Silicon Valley also tried to remake medicine in its own image and just look at the disaster that has been. My preference is we excise Silicon Valley like we would any malignant tumor from the schools, from medicine, from our lives. Let's deal with each other face to face, in real time.
7
I think it's interesting to note that all responses to the opposition essentially boil down to "those people don't want to change and kids seem to like it." If this was an educationally sound approach, I would expect more robust and credible data along with endorsements from actual expert educational practitioners who have nothing to benefit from promoting the product.
3
Forgive me for being a prig, but educators who say, "There's people...," raise a red flag.
The programs and ads are tracking the kids to sell stuff to them, their parents and third-party leeches. The costs, direct and indirect, are immense and insidious.
Individualization in group settings leads to de-socialization of the society at large. Already, kids' idea of meeting with friends is whipping out their cell phones.
One of the most valuable aspects of public education, lost with individualization, is democratization. There's extraordinary value in having kids of different abilities and economic backgrounds mixed in the same homerooms, especially in elementary school.
Excellent point about how Silicon Valley honchos limit or forbid screen time for their own kids.
Glad to see these kids and parents pushing back.
6
I was on the leading edge of web-enabled teaching, developing and offering the first online distance learning courses at the Silicon Valley college at which I was a faculty member for several decades. I was involved with statewide efforts to speed adoption in California's community college system.
The folks in Kansas are right to be concerned.
Online tools can be a _part_ of good educational practice, but they have been grossly over-sold by academic "true believers" (I was one, but have reformed...) and technology companies.
For the vast majority of students, the most effective learning does not come from flashy online media or the newest laptop of tablet product, but from learning what it means to study and from deep, personal interaction with other students and individual faculty members. In person.
Augmenting this core experience with online media is fine, if done with care. Replacing that experience with technology tools and impersonal online learning is not fine.
18
The fundamental and most tragic American fallacy about education is that it simply involves the transfer of facts to the mind and can be done alone. We have always know that this is a total lie and that no one learns by themselves, ever. The self-taught professional is an entire myth that stays alive only due to the lower cost of computer terminals versus human teachers. In an other sense, this is one of the core self-destructive examples of human commoditization our society, where we are lowering the worth of valuable human involvement in teaching at the risk of the continued survival of our nation. Sadly, this is going on throughout the education system.
9
I live in a Canadian province where the new Premier has mandated that students will be required to take one on-line computer based learning course starting the first year of high school, and increasing the number of courses taken this way throughout the 4 years of high school. This is being planned to facilitate the cutting of teachers in the classroom, has not been given a trial run, will not provide students the hardware or guarantee sufficient connectivity is available to them, thus disadvantaging poor students and those living where internet access is unreliable.
We have not been told which software will be used or whether students who cannot successfully manage self directed study will be given any assistance by a teacher.
Thanks for this article. I have another list of questions for the Education Minister now, including about student wellness and socialization as a good education does not neglect student health, both physical and mental.
6
Giving every student a device and a computer program does not "get every kid on an even playing field." Only someone who knows nothing about education, poverty, and how they interact, would think such a thing.
14
@KEL
And how are kids in poor schools doing now? Not so well. Perhaps the inclusion (not wholesale replacement) of computer based learning would actually help poor kids. I grew up in a rural town and can honestly say never had any but mediocre teachers, at best.
"There has not been enough research." Well, techies, this IS the research -- and the results are pretty obvious. School is in great part a socialization process, and online learning is lousy, lousy socialization. Good for Kansans.
18
I'm trying to understand the point of this article -from what I see, there are a number of families that don't like this program and want another alternative. You've presented no data or facts saying there is something wrong with the program (with the exception of one instance of a child with epilepsy who had seizures - something the school district should have anticipated and acted upon), and anecdotal discussion that some people think it's potentially an issue. So what is the point of this article? That the parents aren't being listened to by their school board? You haven't explored this angle. That people have differences of opinion about how students learn? Nothing new there. I read this and all I see is a hatchet job, unsupported, against Summit and Zuckerberg. What's the point here folks? Certainly not journalism.
14
Meanwhile, these tech firms won’t pay their taxes which you go to funding thing like, you know, schools
14
Tech firms, loyal to the far right, drive union teachers to poverty. Good job Kansas Republican Party.
3
Summit sounds marginally better than playing Oregon Trail on floppy disk in the library during Social Studies.
9
Another win for Gov. Brownback's fiscal austerity and its backlash on KS schoolchildren. The net result will be the bible-thumpers pushing for more home schooling and bible studies in public schools. Add KS to the list of third world states (SC, WV, NC, AL,...).
13
Ours is becoming an increasingly lonely world. What a horrible way for 4th graders to learn. Train them to spend the rest of their lives staring at a screen.
11
"Mr. Koenig and his wife, Meggan, enrolled their two children in a Catholic school, using money saved for a kitchen remodel and vacation.
“We’re not Catholic,” Mrs. Koenig said. “But we just felt like it would be a lot easier to have a discussion over dinner about something that they might have heard in a religion class than Summit.”
I get it, so being taught about a sky god and Noah's Ark is so much more helpful to a growing mind than those gosh darn computers.
10
@Mike I'd say that almost universally, Catholic schools stick with phonics instead of trendy techniques to teach children to read. They stick with more traditional teaching methods than the public school systems use. Religion class is only a small part of the day or week when there are constantly concerns about school accreditation, standardized test scores.
1
So the Chan-Zukerberg Initiative is a "charity" that requires the participants to purchase expensive equipment sold only by their private corporation? Sounds like the Trump charity buying his own portrait for his own golf courses. The IRS should be looking into those kind of scams. And no on on the face of our planet thinks that a teacher is nothing more than a "mentor". Why does Silicon Valley fear normal human interaction between actual people?
12
School without teachers. School without discussions. School without ...........
7
OK - let's ponder this statement by the principal: “Students are becoming self-directed learners and are demonstrating greater ownership of their learning activities.” Who needs any teachers at all - hey, just let the kids "self direct their learning" and miraculously they will come out the other end as well educated, articulate students ready for college. Gadgets are not a substitute for teaching. I see what the real effort is - to be able to cut back on teachers. Kind of like the Walmart approach - if you can get people to check their own groceries, with just one clerk hanging around for problems, then why no just have one teach hanging around while kids are "self directing". Oh, and by the way these tech companies no doubt have a darker purpose - roping this kids onto their platforms so they can make even more money. Kids already spend too much time on screen. Screen do not offer creativity, the ability to verbally communicate and hear and debate differing view and ideas. I find this horrifying and if I were a parent who child was being subjected to this I would raise holy heck.
17
If they want to promote self-directed learning, how about bringing back the reading of great books. That's free too, and will certainly result in more intellectual growth than this horrible product.
16
This is a cost-savings via Tech World...think of all the money that can be saved if there are no public school buildings to be maintained, etc. Now Silicon Valley seems to want to take away a very important part of childhood, doing away with learning to interact with others.
Snark: what about high school football, etc.
Children will never know what they don't know if they are never exposed to other ideas from humans who also don't know the programmed answers - or dare to challenge the "conventional wisdom".
4
Reporters Bowles and Singer have not done their due diligence in covering this story. Crucial information has been omitted. All we know of the curriculum from this piece is that there is a link to the Daily Mail article and another link to bikinis.
For instance, what are the scope and sequence of the curriculums? Who designed them and what are their credentials? What is "personalized learning" defined as? What does the "mentoring" that the teachers are doing consist of, and what are the "special projects" that teachers are said to be conducting to supplement the online learning modules? Having perused the links embedded in this piece,I am not finding answers to these questions readily accessible.
As readers, we would be better served if this piece were one of a series exploring the topic of online education in public and charter schools. I, for one, would prefer that to yet another article debating the merits of the SHSAT or the rampant cheating/ bribery in college admissions. The Washington Post covered a protest to Summit Learning that occurred in Brooklyn.
6
@Emily421- please! It's a news item, that reported on a community protest in a fly-over state, that might have got 5 column inches on the front page but no more. It is not an exposé. It has enough balance for what it is.
I would have liked an exploration here of what the software being discussed in this article actually looks like and how it was put together and how do we know it’s any good. Are there any metrics of its effectiveness? This could have been part of a second article and a link to that article could have been included in this article.
Without that sort of information, it is hard to know what to think after reading this article. I do not know if I am reading about a real problem with this particular software, or if this is a perfect example of mass hysteria.
Over the years I have personally seen both terrific and terrible examples of educational software. Maybe taking a look at the software that is the subject of this article could be the subject of a future article in The New York Times?
1000
@Dov Todd
Hit & Miss reporting is becoming the soupe du jour.
With a click-enticing headline like "Silicon Valley Came to Kansas Schools... "- one would expect far more than we got.
43
@Dov Todd
I think that is one problem with evaluating these programs: that everything is considered proprietary and, even if used in public schools, users are supposed to not take screenshots of anything. I have seen this prohibition with online programs used in Denver and Chicago Public Schools, and assume it is the same situation here. And I think that the public's right to vet the actual software -- reading what the students are reading -- should be a requirement for any education software vendor, as for textbook publishers.
101
I don't think the opposition is to the software. I think parents, students and professional educators are opposed to the implementation of an approach that has no basis in research and no metrics to support continued expansion. The fact that Summit declined to participate in the Harvard study says a lot about the true motivation of the company.
131
"Gordon Mohn, McPherson’s superintendent of schools.[says] 'Students are becoming self-directed learners and are demonstrating greater ownership of their learning activities.'”
"Ownership": an apt and telling choice of words.
As usual, follow the money. Silicon Valley corporations have a product to sell, and their business model is no different from Boeing Aircraft, ExxonMobil, or Walmart: maximize profit for investors. Their mantra that disruptive change is inherently good gave us President Trump.
We sadly live in a moment when people not only accept that "fake news" and "alternative facts" are not oxymorons but that they make sense. Thus, when it comes to concern for their children's welfare, they are ready to accept "experts" who are actually real or online salesmen and saleswomen. (Look at anti-vaxxers for the prime current example.)
The teaching of civics, the nature of citizenship, critical thinking, and a sense of communal responsibility has largely gone by the wayside. It thus can seem "appropriate" that each student be given "ownership" of his or her education.
I am happy to see young students rebelling in Kansas, essentially saying, "No, you adults aint always right", much as many young people stood up after the Parkland school massacre. They are the future, and the contemporary world they find themselves in, a world created by "adults", most certainly gives them justification to question how they are being "educated." They are my hope for the future!
3