Do you know of any robust statistics on K-12 with tech versus the low-tech options? Being anti-tech in the classroom has become extremely fashionable among the wealthy SV set, and I instinctively agree with it, but still have some skepticism. And of course the confounder is that the rich families' kids will do fine regardless.
Anecdotally, when I was in graduate school we had one class in which the teacher banned laptops and even refused my request to use a simple old-fashioned word processor. I remember classroom discussion being slightly more spirited (and I did do slightly better in that class than the rest of the core graduate curriculum) but otherwise I didn't really notice any difference in retention.
I'd also note that I fairly recently helped some high-achieving (but low income) high schoolers with their college essays. The most frightening part of the process was that none of them knew how to type, presumably because they are one of the last cohorts not to grow up in the Chromebook-saturated classroom and did not have access to a laptop/desktop at home (home laptop penetration is plunging nationwide AFAIK). Given the extremely high share of skilled jobs that require at the very least the ability to type well and navigate office apps, felt a bit ominous.
The entire world we live in was basically invented and built by people who never routinely saw a computer in their classroom. "I wonder how we'll survive without having Chromebooks for a little Becky and Jimmy?"
The Waldorf schools, the Montessori schools, and many other schools have a low or no screen policy --especially for younger kids for whom it's critical.
Kids should explore the world, not the advertising edge cases of Google and the consumer delights of Facebook Prime and Twittazon.
if I had a computer that had "all the world's knowledge" and could operate "at infinite speed" and give you "data in zero time" how does that work as an impedance match for the human perceptual system and our measured cognitive development that's taken place and built our many cultures over the ages? (Left as an exercise for the reader.)
Human beings and human intelligence are so intensely powerful that even using that selfsame intelligence we can't figure out how our intelligence works. And Wise Guys and Latte Sippers around the world are arguing with each other about "how smart their AI is" and we're nowhere close. Yes,let's cheer our successes, but let's be even more aware of the howling chasm between what we need as humans and what these little advertising data collection boxes are selling us. God help us.
Do you know of any robust statistics on K-12 with tech versus the low-tech options? Being anti-tech in the classroom has become extremely fashionable among the wealthy SV set, and I instinctively agree with it, but still have some skepticism. And of course the confounder is that the rich families' kids will do fine regardless.
Anecdotally, when I was in graduate school we had one class in which the teacher banned laptops and even refused my request to use a simple old-fashioned word processor. I remember classroom discussion being slightly more spirited (and I did do slightly better in that class than the rest of the core graduate curriculum) but otherwise I didn't really notice any difference in retention.
I'd also note that I fairly recently helped some high-achieving (but low income) high schoolers with their college essays. The most frightening part of the process was that none of them knew how to type, presumably because they are one of the last cohorts not to grow up in the Chromebook-saturated classroom and did not have access to a laptop/desktop at home (home laptop penetration is plunging nationwide AFAIK). Given the extremely high share of skilled jobs that require at the very least the ability to type well and navigate office apps, felt a bit ominous.
The entire world we live in was basically invented and built by people who never routinely saw a computer in their classroom. "I wonder how we'll survive without having Chromebooks for a little Becky and Jimmy?"
The Waldorf schools, the Montessori schools, and many other schools have a low or no screen policy --especially for younger kids for whom it's critical.
Kids should explore the world, not the advertising edge cases of Google and the consumer delights of Facebook Prime and Twittazon.
if I had a computer that had "all the world's knowledge" and could operate "at infinite speed" and give you "data in zero time" how does that work as an impedance match for the human perceptual system and our measured cognitive development that's taken place and built our many cultures over the ages? (Left as an exercise for the reader.)
Human beings and human intelligence are so intensely powerful that even using that selfsame intelligence we can't figure out how our intelligence works. And Wise Guys and Latte Sippers around the world are arguing with each other about "how smart their AI is" and we're nowhere close. Yes,let's cheer our successes, but let's be even more aware of the howling chasm between what we need as humans and what these little advertising data collection boxes are selling us. God help us.