[QUOTE=Surma;29125072]Having not read all the replies, I do not know if this has already been said.
Assets like google and calculators exist for a reason. They exist so that we humans do not need to waste valuable time learning facts and doing math that we have specialised tools for, which can do it faster and with better accuracy. You need to know why the math works, because that is the only way to use it correctly. If you don't understand the abstract pattern behind why the calc gives you the right answer then one day you will input the wrong numbers, get the wrong result and something bad will happen. But after having learnes that there is absolutely no point in proceeding to do so. It only results in a loss of productivity.
As for knowledge, in the past times knowledge in recorded form was not abundant. Therefore you had to learn all the facts, because you could not find them elsewhere. Now you can, with google. So use it. Don't memorise the mass of the proton when you can look it up. Spend your time learning how you can use the number, and other numbers instead. Understanding the principles behind how something works instead of just knowing the results of each equation.
Why? Facts get old really fast. The world is changing at an ever increasing pace, new truths are discovered and old truths are found to be invalid. But if you learn how to find the facts and more inportantly, separate truth from lie (source criticism) you will be able to instantly retreive any piece of information, know how to use it and know if it is correct or not. If you just learn all the facts 1/4 of your lifework will be obsolete and useless within 10 years.
It was not very smart of you to cheat, but a kid in school simply can not be expected to know how bad it is for your future to cheat. Your teachers should have been paying more attention.[/QUOTE]
Good point, but has every source of information that you've found on the internet been correct?
I mean, yeah the correct answer will more than likely be out there somewhere but theres alot of shit that you need to wade through and sometime's even mistake the answer for something that is incorrect.
Also, I'd like to point out that I didn't cheat often in high school.
[editline]12th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=DrBreen;29124668]anyways it's silly it's like blaming pencils that feathers never got used again or something[/QUOTE]
It's nothing like that.
For starters, I'm not blaming anyone or anything and second of all the pencil replaced the feather because it does the exact same thing.
A book about a certain historical date will have (hopefully) all of the information about that historical date whereas the net could have completely different facts from many different websites.
Look at Wikipedia for example, It's a site filled with information that can be altered by you or me, making it flawed as the information might be incorrect.
Books are checked over and over to ensure that the information it contains is absolutely correct as they are expensive to re-produce.
Now let's say that you have to answer a question about something that happened in that specific historical date, you knew that you had a test on it so you didn't study because you can just instantly search for the results right there and then whereas if you only had a book, you would have studied the book and eventually learnt the key parts.
This is pretty much why I'm voicing my opinion here, by removing the book with technology your removing the learning process.
Instead of teaching a child to research and study, your teaching it to search with technology.
Or even better put, you ask the child a question like "where did the name 'cloud' come from?"
They search for the answer and find it and present the answer, but what would happen if the child was suddenly asked 'Why?'
The Child would then have to search again why that specific name was chosen and re-present that answer.
In a book all of that would be together and the child would already know the second question.
That's probably a bad way of putting it but I hope you get the gist of it..
I don't know what kind of school you went to, but in mine we automatically fail a test if we are caught with a phone or ipod out. Honestly it sounds as if the issue you described was incompetent teachers and not technology.
And during final exams if we are caught even having an electronic device on us we get our exam taken away...
[QUOTE=igamiwarr;29126508]I don't know what kind of school you went to, but in mine we automatically fail a test if we are caught with a phone or ipod out. Honestly it sounds as if the issue you described was incompetent teachers and not technology.
And during final exams if we are caught even having an electronic device on us we get our exam taken away...[/QUOTE]
Ive already replies to several of these responses.
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29126754]Ive already replies to several of these responses.[/QUOTE]
Your replies were dumb as fuck, it is easy as hell to see if a student is fucking with a phone during an exam.
snip
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29125362]Good point, but has every source of information that you've found on the internet been correct?
I mean, yeah the correct answer will more than likely be out there somewhere but theres alot of shit that you need to wade through and sometime's even mistake the answer for something that is incorrect.
Also, I'd like to point out that I didn't cheat often in high school.
[editline]12th April 2011[/editline]
It's nothing like that.
For starters, I'm not blaming anyone or anything and second of all the pencil replaced the feather because it does the exact same thing.
A book about a certain historical date will have (hopefully) all of the information about that historical date whereas the net could have completely different facts from many different websites.
Look at Wikipedia for example, It's a site filled with information that can be altered by you or me, making it flawed as the information might be incorrect.
Books are checked over and over to ensure that the information it contains is absolutely correct as they are expensive to re-produce.
Now let's say that you have to answer a question about something that happened in that specific historical date, you knew that you had a test on it so you didn't study because you can just instantly search for the results right there and then whereas if you only had a book, you would have studied the book and eventually learnt the key parts.
This is pretty much why I'm voicing my opinion here, by removing the book with technology your removing the learning process.
Instead of teaching a child to research and study, your teaching it to search with technology.
Or even better put, you ask the child a question like "where did the name 'cloud' come from?"
They search for the answer and find it and present the answer, but what would happen if the child was suddenly asked 'Why?'
The Child would then have to search again why that specific name was chosen and re-present that answer.
In a book all of that would be together and the child would already know the second question.
That's probably a bad way of putting it but I hope you get the gist of it..[/QUOTE]
Thank you.
You, in your argument against technology and THE FUTURE, have pointed out a fundamental flaw of education.
Education shouldn't be about learning nonsensical facts about every topic ever.
I mean, there should be essential facts and ideas taught, but to be honest, much like the child asking why something is the way it is, you have to ask why it needs to be known.
The often stated quote is "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it." But that is a misquote, and the real thing is considerably more poignant. "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't know history. I'm saying that what we need to know is analysis, problem solving, learning. Not pointless and rote memorization of facts for the purpose of passing a test, the only purpose of which is to make sure you know these nonsensical facts about tiny aspects of history.
The child should be able to analyze and problem solve and figure out "why". The why is more important than the facts themselves, because without the why they are nothing.
That's the flaw here. We keep thinking that memorizing facts and figures is the only way to have an education, because we grew up in such an environment, and that's the only kind of education anyone's ever had.
Instead, what we need is an education built around the analysis, the problem solving, the total beauty of the facts and ideas coming together to form a new idea, a new imagination, a new concept, and a new reason.
Rote memorization makes you remember some facts. It also makes you resent them, and resent learning.
There are a few people who like that sort of thing, and those are our A+ students that go on to do a spectacular amount of nothing, because while they know all this nonsense, and think they're good at it, they work and answer for the test, they answer what the teacher wants to hear, without considering what goes on behind it.
We need the society in which all that nonsense is behind us. One that focuses on the teaching of skills and aids students in wanting to learn. And none of the "make a problem that's boring more interesting by rewording it". Those are honestly insulting to students. The only challenge there is figuring out what the teacher meant before it became cutesy. real problem solving. Interesting problem solving. Making things interesting and challenging and exciting from the start, and focusing on letting students learn what they want and need to learn. Letting them figure out things for themselves, to a degree. Giving them the tools to learn and setting them lose, with some guidance.
In such a system, cheating is harder, students want to cheat less simply because it's interesting, and everyone ends up better in the long run and the short run.
[QUOTE=igamiwarr;29126773]Your replies were dumb as fuck, it is easy as hell to see if a student is fucking with a phone during an exam.[/QUOTE]
Clearly you haven't been a teacher
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29125362]Good point, but has every source of information that you've found on the internet been correct?
I mean, yeah the correct answer will more than likely be out there somewhere but theres alot of shit that you need to wade through and sometime's even mistake the answer for something that is incorrect.
Also, I'd like to point out that I didn't cheat often in high school.
[editline]12th April 2011[/editline]
It's nothing like that.
For starters, I'm not blaming anyone or anything and second of all the pencil replaced the feather because it does the exact same thing.
A book about a certain historical date will have (hopefully) all of the information about that historical date whereas the net could have completely different facts from many different websites.
Look at Wikipedia for example, It's a site filled with information that can be altered by you or me, making it flawed as the information might be incorrect.
Books are checked over and over to ensure that the information it contains is absolutely correct as they are expensive to re-produce.
Now let's say that you have to answer a question about something that happened in that specific historical date, you knew that you had a test on it so you didn't study because you can just instantly search for the results right there and then whereas if you only had a book, you would have studied the book and eventually learnt the key parts.
This is pretty much why I'm voicing my opinion here, by removing the book with technology your removing the learning process.
Instead of teaching a child to research and study, your teaching it to search with technology.
Or even better put, you ask the child a question like "where did the name 'cloud' come from?"
They search for the answer and find it and present the answer, but what would happen if the child was suddenly asked 'Why?'
The Child would then have to search again why that specific name was chosen and re-present that answer.
In a book all of that would be together and the child would already know the second question.
That's probably a bad way of putting it but I hope you get the gist of it..[/QUOTE]
i see what you mean, but, Wikipedia is part of the future wheter we like it or not
-snip again-
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29126823]Clearly you haven't been a teacher[/QUOTE]
Admittedly, there are telltale signs, but I have to agree with you mostly because they can't watch everyone all the time.
As soon as you start learning past, you know, rote learning, you have to actually cite everything, so you can't just make shit up.
[QUOTE=Treybuchet;29126822]Thank you.
You, in your argument against technology and THE FUTURE, have pointed out a fundamental flaw of education.
Education shouldn't be about learning nonsensical facts about every topic ever.
I mean, there should be essential facts and ideas taught, but to be honest, much like the child asking why something is the way it is, you have to ask why it needs to be known.
The often stated quote is "Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it." But that is a misquote, and the real thing is considerably more poignant. "Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't know history. I'm saying that what we need to know is analysis, problem solving, learning. Not pointless and rote memorization of facts for the purpose of passing a test, the only purpose of which is to make sure you know these nonsensical facts about tiny aspects of history.
The child should be able to analyze and problem solve and figure out "why". The why is more important than the facts themselves, because without the why they are nothing.
That's the flaw here. We keep thinking that memorizing facts and figures is the only way to have an education, because we grew up in such an environment, and that's the only kind of education anyone's ever had.
Instead, what we need is an education built around the analysis, the problem solving, the total beauty of the facts and ideas coming together to form a new idea, a new imagination, a new concept, and a new reason.
Rote memorization makes you remember some facts. It also makes you resent them, and resent learning.
There are a few people who like that sort of thing, and those are our A+ students that go on to do a spectacular amount of nothing, because while they know all this nonsense, and think they're good at it, they work and answer for the test, they answer what the teacher wants to hear, without considering what goes on behind it.
We need the society in which all that nonsense is behind us. One that focuses on the teaching of skills and aids students in wanting to learn. And none of the "make a problem that's boring more interesting by rewording it". Those are honestly insulting to students. The only challenge there is figuring out what the teacher meant before it became cutesy. real problem solving. Interesting problem solving. Making things interesting and challenging and exciting from the start, and focusing on letting students learn what they want and need to learn. Letting them figure out things for themselves, to a degree. Giving them the tools to learn and setting them lose, with some guidance.
In such a system, cheating is harder, students want to cheat less simply because it's interesting, and everyone ends up better in the long run and the short run.[/QUOTE]
Agreed.
But I'm not against Technology or THE FUTURE by any means so please, just stop with it.
[quote]what we need is an education built around the analysis, the problem solving, the total beauty of the facts and ideas coming together to form a new idea, a new imagination, a new concept, and a new reason.[/quote]
That education exists.
It's called university.
[QUOTE=Contag;29123561]Yeah, people try to cheat using cell phones.
Fucking stupid, because most of the exams here are structured so that if even if it was open book, you'd be screwed if you didn't know what to do without looking at the book.[/QUOTE]
I know that, but I had no idea "most schools" confiscate cell phones before exams. I've never heard of anyone doing that.
[QUOTE=Contag;29126919]That education exists.
It's called university.[/QUOTE]
We need it earlier, though, for a couple reasons:
1. Students aren't really prepared for university style things. A student who thinks they are excellent at math because they were great at memorizing everything you do in math in highschool and earlier, can still end up being terrible at what math actually is, an art centering around making theorems and ideas and concepts in a space in which everything and anything is possible.
2. It's generally beneficial no matter what you do to have those skills, and they put us above everyone. What the hell do test scores mean? That we're able to teach our students to memorize a bunch of useless shit, and then compare it to each other and claim one or the other has superior teaching methods even though all those methods result in learning junk just to pass a silly test. What a fucking rat race that is. That's no motivation, no reason. You do well and learn because it's interesting and because you want to, not because someone forced you for a reason you don't fully understand. That's what needs to be changed.
[QUOTE=Treybuchet;29127089]What the hell do test scores mean? That we're able to teach our students to memorize a bunch of useless shit, and then compare it to each other and claim one or the other has superior teaching methods even though all those methods result in learning junk just to pass a silly test. What a fucking rat race that is. That's no motivation, no reason. You do well and learn because it's interesting and because you want to, not because someone forced you for a reason you don't fully understand. That's what needs to be changed.[/QUOTE]
qft
Personally, I want to do well but I end up not doing well. Like, say, in math. I get a quiz about something. I get between 60-80%, rarely above 80. These tests are all about memorization. You remember how to find what "y" equals in 2x+5y=110 and you're fine, you pass, you're "good at math". You don't remember, you fail, you're "bad at math". But I was never good with math to begin with. Sure, I know that 5*50=250 or that 4/12 is 1/3, but that's all I'll need in my career. I want to teach history. The only math I'll need is that WWII happened between 1939 and 1945, how many years was the war? Six. That's it. I don't need to know calculus.
I do bad because I suck at math and because my teacher's incompetent. They have to explain why if x approaches infinity on a graph, then f(x) approaches negative infinity, but they don't explain it. I ask myself, "Will I need this?" The answer is no.
The No Child Left Behind Act should really be ended now. Standardized tests? Pfft. They're only a measurement of how your students do, and then schools are compared. Then they say that "whites did so-and-so percent better than African-Americans". That's segregation. No question.
Teachers these days do not have to explain. Take, for example, my oh so awesome school board, Pittsburgh Public Schools Department of Education or whatever. They told my physics teacher to stop lecturing (when I was learning fine) and teach their way, which involves being given a worksheet and doing it without any explanation (resulting in no learning). Because of this, I'm gonna fail the final exam in physics, most likely. Land of the free? Bullshit. If a teacher cannot teach their own way and develop their own curriculum, then that is not freedom. I'm not teaching your way, I teach my way. Why can't more teachers across the nation say this, cause an uproar? I'd support it. I'm a future educator.
Judging by your writing you were bad at more than math, and since you said none of your devices had internet, I don't see how any of them could help you cheat.
[QUOTE=Ignyte;29125362]Good point, but has every source of information that you've found on the internet been correct?
I mean, yeah the correct answer will more than likely be out there somewhere but theres alot of shit that you need to wade through and sometime's even mistake the answer for something that is incorrect.
[/quote]
Like I said, source criticism. Has to be one of the most valuable lessons I've learned from school.
[editline]13th April 2011[/editline]
[QUOTE=AmericanInfantry;29132176]qft
Personally, I want to do well but I end up not doing well. Like, say, in math. I get a quiz about something. I get between 60-80%, rarely above 80. These tests are all about memorization. You remember how to find what "y" equals in 2x+5y=110 and you're fine, you pass, you're "good at math". You don't remember, you fail, you're "bad at math". But I was never good with math to begin with. Sure, I know that 5*50=250 or that 4/12 is 1/3, but that's all I'll need in my career. I want to teach history. The only math I'll need is that WWII happened between 1939 and 1945, how many years was the war? Six. That's it. I don't need to know calculus.
I do bad because I suck at math and because my teacher's incompetent. They have to explain why if x approaches infinity on a graph, then f(x) approaches negative infinity, but they don't explain it. I ask myself, "Will I need this?" The answer is no.
The No Child Left Behind Act should really be ended now. Standardized tests? Pfft. They're only a measurement of how your students do, and then schools are compared. Then they say that "whites did so-and-so percent better than African-Americans". That's segregation. No question.
Teachers these days do not have to explain. Take, for example, my oh so awesome school board, Pittsburgh Public Schools Department of Education or whatever. They told my physics teacher to stop lecturing (when I was learning fine) and teach their way, which involves being given a worksheet and doing it without any explanation (resulting in no learning). Because of this, I'm gonna fail the final exam in physics, most likely. Land of the free? Bullshit. If a teacher cannot teach their own way and develop their own curriculum, then that is not freedom. I'm not teaching your way, I teach my way. Why can't more teachers across the nation say this, cause an uproar? I'd support it. I'm a future educator.[/QUOTE]
Agree.
On my school the teachers try to use what we call "individanpassat lärande" (Individual-adapted teaching). The teachers try as far as they can to both create assignments that suits as many as possible (i.e. create assignments that are very general an un-defined so that you can essentially create your own, a framework sort of approach). They are also very flexible so that if one pupil prefers to orally display their knowledge they can, either public in front of the class or private with just the teacher. If someone prefers to write a test, they can, and so on. We are encouraged to find our own ways of learning and showing what we know. And of course, if someone prefers the old method of teaching with lectures followed by tests they can do that.
And it fuckin' works.
[QUOTE=Surma;29143860]Like I said, source criticism. Has to be one of the most valuable lessons I've learned from school.
[editline]13th April 2011[/editline]
Sounds like a pretty effective method. I don't get why our national Department of Education can't look at how other countries do education and mimic them.
Agree.
On my school the teachers try to use what we call "individanpassat lärande" (Individual-adapted teaching). The teachers try as far as they can to both create assignments that suits as many as possible (i.e. create assignments that are very general an un-defined so that you can essentially create your own, a framework sort of approach). They are also very flexible so that if one pupil prefers to orally display their knowledge they can, either public in front of the class or private with just the teacher. If someone prefers to write a test, they can, and so on. We are encouraged to find our own ways of learning and showing what we know. And of course, if someone prefers the old method of teaching with lectures followed by tests they can do that.
And it fuckin' works.[/QUOTE]
Sounds pretty effective. I don't know why our government cannot take a page from other countries and mimic how they do education.
[QUOTE=LF9000;29100056]Ok lets go back to using sticks
And instead of smartphones let them use abacuses and telegraphs[/QUOTE]
great idea LF9000, take the idea that technology may be softening us up and blow it out of proportion saying that the OP is the next Henry David Thorough. Brilliant.
[QUOTE=AmericanInfantry;29132176]qft
Personally, I want to do well but I end up not doing well. Like, say, in math. I get a quiz about something. I get between 60-80%, rarely above 80. These tests are all about memorization. You remember how to find what "y" equals in 2x+5y=110 and you're fine, you pass, you're "good at math". You don't remember, you fail, you're "bad at math". But I was never good with math to begin with. Sure, I know that 5*50=250 or that 4/12 is 1/3, but that's all I'll need in my career. I want to teach history. The only math I'll need is that WWII happened between 1939 and 1945, how many years was the war? Six. That's it. I don't need to know calculus.
I do bad because I suck at math and because my teacher's incompetent. They have to explain why if x approaches infinity on a graph, then f(x) approaches negative infinity, but they don't explain it. I ask myself, "Will I need this?" The answer is no.
The No Child Left Behind Act should really be ended now. Standardized tests? Pfft. They're only a measurement of how your students do, and then schools are compared. Then they say that "whites did so-and-so percent better than African-Americans". That's segregation. No question.
Teachers these days do not have to explain. Take, for example, my oh so awesome school board, Pittsburgh Public Schools Department of Education or whatever. They told my physics teacher to stop lecturing (when I was learning fine) and teach their way, which involves being given a worksheet and doing it without any explanation (resulting in no learning). Because of this, I'm gonna fail the final exam in physics, most likely. Land of the free? Bullshit. If a teacher cannot teach their own way and develop their own curriculum, then that is not freedom. I'm not teaching your way, I teach my way. Why can't more teachers across the nation say this, cause an uproar? I'd support it. I'm a future educator[/QUOTE]
The worst part is that schools have figured out how to game the system to get more funding.
calculators make math fun :downs:
[QUOTE=Treybuchet;29146775]The worst part is that schools have figured out how to game the system to get more funding.[/QUOTE]
I'm not saying that more funding for education is bad, here, just so you know. It's a decent thing.
I'm saying that they are playing the system to get as much money as possible with no effort, as well as cheating the fact that it's supposed to get more challenging to meet the standards each year. It's not how it should be done, essentially.
technology is awesome. no more going around the world for photos.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;29102631]Quite the reverse is true for your argument: technology is making it possible for anybody with an internet-connected phone to have instant access to the entire wealth of combined human knowledge--effectively meaning that anybody can learn about anything at any time.
For instance, take websites like [url="http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/Wikiversity:Main_Page"]Wikiversity[/url] or [url="http://www.khanacademy.org/"]Khan Academy[/url]. This is study material at your fingertips, and it's free and available to everybody. You say that the ability to look up anything you need to know about an academic subject is akin to cheating, but I call it problem-solving. If I were building a fish tank, and needed to calculate its volume but could not remember the correct formula, I'd be shit out of luck unless I just happened to have a math whiz or the proper textbook nearby. In this day and age, I can simply look up [url="http://www.helpingwithmath.com/by_subject/geometry/geo_volume.htm"]"calculating volume"[/url] and I'm good to go.
Perhaps proper long division skills and an encyclopedic memory of formulas and principles is a lost art, but is it really a necessary one?[/QUOTE]
I agree, it's school rules on prohibiting such technology that's actually inhibiting the productivity of students. My iPod Touch can be a calculator and all my school textbooks. I could save hundreds and my school could save thousands if everyone had some form of PDA.
[QUOTE=Monomiro;29152925]I agree, it's school rules on prohibiting such technology that's actually inhibiting the productivity of students. My iPod Touch can be a calculator and all my history textbooks. I could save hundreds and my school could save thousands if everyone had some form of PDA.[/QUOTE]
Very true but not everyone has the money for an iPod Touch (like myself).
I actually had an idea for an e-notebook you can have (kinda like Steam but for school-related things) but I doubt it would work.
[QUOTE=AmericanInfantry;29153420]Very true but not everyone has the money for an iPod Touch (like myself).
I actually had an idea for an e-notebook you can have (kinda like Steam but for school-related things) but I doubt it would work.[/QUOTE]
It doesn't have to be an iPod Touch though. If you make that one semi-expensive investment now, you'd save a lot of money later.
[QUOTE=Monomiro;29152925]I agree, it's school rules on prohibiting such technology that's actually inhibiting the productivity of students. My iPod Touch can be a calculator and all my school textbooks. I could save hundreds and my school could save thousands if everyone had some form of PDA.[/QUOTE]
Why would the school save thousands?
They make a killing off the overpriced 'approved' text books.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.