How a Radical New Teaching Method Could Unleash a Generation of Genius

[socialist]

http://www.wired.com/business/2013/10/free-thinkers/

There are many outfits out there who think they have the answer on how to improve education. Maybe computers are the answer to improving education.

[PIK]

How about we get back to the basics. We do not need anything radical, the old way worked fine, when we had proper teachers. All we have to do is get teachers back to teaching.

[jacee]

How about we get back to the basics. We do not need anything radical, the old way worked fine, when we had proper teachers. All we have to do is get teachers back to teaching.

Computers are "the basics" now.

[GostHacked]

Computers are "the basics" now.

At what age do you determine the basics of computers can be taught to kids? Maybe after grade school.

[Mighty AC]

How about we get back to the basics. We do not need anything radical, the old way worked fine, when we had proper teachers. All we have to do is get teachers back to teaching.

PIK's comments show why it is so hard to reform education. Most people, teachers included, have a hard time seeing beyond how they were taught.

The old way is not fine. Too many students are left behind and just as many are bored and held back. Lecture and whole class instruction are not effective and should be used sparingly. Spoon feeding knowledge and then just testing what happened to stick is inadequate. Forcing entire classes to learn each concept at the same time and at the same pace is a ridiculous notion.

In the past it would have been extremely difficult and time consuming to differentiate instruction at a per student level. Allowing each to progress at different rates, covering different levels and amounts of content would have been almost impossible. However, with the technology we have now this is no longer an issue.

It is time to move the teacher from the front of the class to the middle of the action. Students need to be independently seeking, skeptically evaluating and applying information on their own with a teacher facilitating this process at the individual or small group level. The old way was fine for the economy of the 50's, but now we need dynamic, critically thinking, self learners.

Edited December 5, 2013 by Mighty AC

[Mighty AC]

At what age do you determine the basics of computers can be taught to kids? Maybe after grade school.

The basics of computers don't have to be taught. Kids grow up with access to tech now and figure it out on their own. I have young kids and it amazes me to see how quickly they adapt to new technology through trial and error. The average grade 1 student can competently navigate tablets and smartphone interfaces. They are also comfortable with the mouse and keyboard setup and can single finger type well enough on Qwerty keyboards.

[GostHacked]

The old way is not fine. Too many students are left behind and just as many are bored and held back. Lecture and whole class instruction are not effective and should be used sparingly. Spoon feeding knowledge and then just testing what happened to stick is inadequate. Forcing entire classes to learn each concept at the same time and at the same pace is a ridiculous notion.

I agree some changes need to be made. Children are getting left behind. But you then need to gear the classes differently or split the classes up somehow. Some are smarter than others. Some excel at math more than others. I think recognizing the strong points of a child is what is missing.

Sure they can learn things on their own. But it takes a good teacher to recognize those abilities and help the child develop them. I am not against new ways of teaching, I am just concerned that those who discover things on their own may only do them damage in the long run with an incompatible way of problem solving.

They will discover that the tried and true ways of solving basic math is not going to change. They won't discover anything new at this level. All the discoveries are made with the more complex forms of math.

It is time to move the teacher from the front of the class to the middle of the action. Students need to be independently seeking, skeptically evaluating and applying information on their own with a teacher facilitating this process at the individual or small group level. The old way was fine for the economy of the 50's, but now we need dynamic, critically thinking, self learners.

This I have no problem with, but still the basics need to be taught, not discovered. And the thing is we ALWAYS needed dynamic critically thinking self learners. The whole history of the educational system has been geared towards mediocrity instead of recognizing certain abilities in children to make them great.

I suck at math. No amount of teaching or discovery can help be simply because my brain is not wired that way. Many like me simply SUCK at math. So I guess a child could use the discovery method to discover that they suck at math. What do we do then? To me no big deal, there are many other things a person can do.

I agree discovery can help later on, but the basics need to be taught first. And there really is only one current way of doing that. Even if you used technology, the basics still need to be taught.

[socialist]

PIK's comments show why it is so hard to reform education. Most people, teachers included, have a hard time seeing beyond how they were taught.

The old way is not fine. Too many students are left behind and just as many are bored and held back. Lecture and whole class instruction are not effective and should be used sparingly. Spoon feeding knowledge and then just testing what happened to stick is inadequate. Forcing entire classes to learn each concept at the same time and at the same pace is a ridiculous notion.

In the past it would have been extremely difficult and time consuming to differentiate instruction at a per student level. Allowing each to progress at different rates, covering different levels and amounts of content would have been almost impossible. However, with the technology we have now this is no longer an issue.

It is time to move the teacher from the front of the class to the middle of the action. Students need to be independently seeking, skeptically evaluating and ainformation on their own with a teacher facilitating this process at the individuMaybe online learning is the al or small group level. The old way was fine for the economy of the 50's, but now we need dynamic, critically thinking, self learners.

Interesting. Do you have any actual research that proves that what you say is the best way to teach? Maybe teachers aren't even needed anymore. Maybe online learning is the wave of the future without well-paid "facillitators".

[Mighty AC]

I agree discovery can help later on, but the basics need to be taught first. And there really is only one current way of doing that. Even if you used technology, the basics still need to be taught.

My points pertain to middle schoolers and older. In the primary grades students don't yet have the literacy and numeracy skills that are necessary. They're still learning to read not reading to learn. Though there are multiple methods of building in enrichment and remediation that should be used in the younger grades.

[Mighty AC]

Interesting. Do you have any actual research that proves that what you say is the best way to teach? Maybe teachers aren't even needed anymore. Maybe online learning is the wave of the future without well-paid "facillitators".

In many cases, especially at the post secondary level, face-to-face facilitators are not always necessary. However, at grade 12 and below, I think too many students would slip through the cracks if we relied on them to complete the necessary learning or even ask for help when they need it.

At the post secondary level I've seen reports on both sides of the e-learning debate. http://www.ecampusnews.com/top-news/study-online-learning-less-effective-for-some/

[PIK]

So you want a population of people that are brain dead without a comp in thier hand.. People still need to be able to funtion on thier own,without the help of a comp. You still need to use your brain and letting a machine do everything for you is a recipe for disaster.

[jacee]

At what age do you determine the basics of computers can be taught to kids? Maybe after grade school.

3 year olds are quite adept at using computers and smart phones these days.

[jacee]

So you want a population of people that are brain dead without a comp in thier hand.. People still need to be able to funtion on thier own,without the help of a comp. You still need to use your brain and letting a machine do everything for you is a recipe for disaster.

Do you know how to use a computer PIK?

They don't do your thinking for you.

.

[socialist]

3 year olds are quite adept at using computers and smart phones these days.

Do you want a 3 year old to become addicted to a smartphone or ipad? Is that healthy. I'd say a 10 year old with little knowledge of Ipads and smartphones could very quickly catch on.

I see too many teens who are oblivious of the world around them because they are smartphone "addicts". I don't know why I'm starting to see things differently.

[cybercoma]

At what age do you determine the basics of computers can be taught to kids? Maybe after grade school.

They've been teaching kids in elementary schools how to use computers since the early-mid 80s.

[GostHacked]

3 year olds are quite adept at using computers and smart phones these days.

I am against very young children using the tech before they know how to interact with other humans. Then you have people like today rather interact with each other through the tech. Even when they are sitting right beside each other. Take a look around you when out and about and observe how people are with this tech. That is if one can put the device down long enough to take a look around.

They've been teaching kids in elementary schools how to use computers since the early-mid 80s.

And it was a waste of time for me. We learned how to play games on the computer back in grade 6. Only in high school computers were used for programing and learning.

[cybercoma]

Have you ever seen an elderly person that hasn't used computers ever try to use one? Even playing games is important. It teaches you how to interact with the computer. Something that's taken for granted now that you know how to do it, but it certainly a learned ability. It's important.

[kimmy]

How about we get back to the basics. We do not need anything radical, the old way worked fine, when we had proper teachers. All we have to do is get teachers back to teaching.

"The basics" were great, back in the days when basic functional literacy and numeracy were all it took to get a job that provided a middle-class income.

-k

[socialist]

"The basics" were great, back in the days when basic functional literacy and numeracy were all it took to get a job that provided a middle-class income.

-k

So what is happening in public schools presently that will prepare kids for getting an upper class job?

For instance, what is the school system doing to prepare a kid to become a pharmacist?

[Mighty AC]

So what is happening in public schools presently that will prepare kids for getting an upper class job?

For instance, what is the school system doing to prepare a kid to become a pharmacist?

In the past our education system was geared towards memorizing facts and a static set of skills. Elementary and secondary students were treated like sponges, just there to soak up information. Education was passive and unidirectional. Now we've shifted towards teaching students to be critically thinking, self learners. Kids are being taught how to access, evaluate and apply information in younger grades. These skills are necessary in world where information is instantly accessible and job skill sets must change frequently. I'm happy with the direction education is heading, but bothered by the slow pace of change.