The decade-long "learning recession"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It's not just smart phones and social media. A lot of these losses are happening among elementary age kids who don't have access to either. But the reliance on Ed Tech to teach math and reading is a big problem. Blaming screens at home doesn't make sense because kids have been watching screens at home for decades, that's not something that started in 2015.

What shifted for kids is they went from mostly using books, paper, and pencil in the classroom to using 1:1 devices and ed tech software. That's true for kids who were get zero screen time at home, and it's true for kids who get hours of screen time at home every day.

Go back to physical books, handwriting, and working out math problems with pencil and paper. Studies show that children retain information better and longer when they learn it from physical media instead of digitally.

Couldn't agree with you more. My child gets maybe one 30 minute show every week and that's it for screen time at home. But at school they have 1-to-1 iPads all day, and in all classes except PE. Child was taught to guess rather than read phonetically at school. Was also taught how to drag boxes across different learning apps, and how to click buttons to take state/natl tests on the iPad. Child is only in 2nd and so far at home we have had to independently teach phonics/ blends, addition/subtraction/multiplication/division, grammar, spelling, and geometrical shapes and area. We have literally had to emphasize practice with pencil and paper at home, because child did not know how to line up numbers to do sums or how to write neatly on the page. Not because of dysgraphia or dyslexia, but because they do it all on screens at school. I have no idea how we are going to supplement science and history. I feel English and Math already take up all of our time. We are planning to supplement with a drawing class over the summer since they just play with the Brushes app on the iPad during art at school.

Have you considered asking the teacher to collect your child’s device?

It’s not my child’s device. It’s a school issued iPad. The teacher pushes out “work” (video games or drag and drop exercises within learning apps) to all kids and the kids have to complete them on the iPad. It’s not a paper based assignment that has been digitized, so there is no paper option.

[Anonymous]

Well if we let the kiddos have recess for 10 straight years with no learning, disruptions galore, 8 hrs per day of video games. Recession is not to far off from the perpetual recess they instituted.

[Anonymous]

Why would you think the teachers
Would be putting together anything? These excellent programs are put together professionally and bought by the school department.

This is not true of every district. Mine doesn’t have content developers, so outside of the reading program, we are on our own.

[Anonymous]

Excellent is not the word I would use. I would use "steaming pile of crap" to describe the tech they force teachers to use. When it turns brains into mush they blame the teachers in order to sell more manure at the expense of teacher careers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well if we let the kiddos have recess for 10 straight years with no learning, disruptions galore, 8 hrs per day of video games. Recession is not to far off from the perpetual recess they instituted.

I’d rather my 8 yo son go out for extra recess than do another drag and drop or QR code “learning session.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really a school created problem.

When schools noticed that top students deeply understood math concepts, they changed the curriculum for everyone. They assumed that forcing all children to learn through abstract, big-picture thinking would automatically make them better at math. However, this ignored how math skills actually develop.

High-performing students often master the rules, formulas, and repetitive practice first, using that solid foundation to unlock deeper conceptual understanding later. By removing traditional math practice and drill-work from classrooms, schools left average and struggling students without the basic tools they need, ultimately making them worse at both the formulas and the concepts.

For example, students spend a massive amount of wasted time as teachers get them to draw out pictures and circles to understand multiplication, talk about it, and try to construct their own understanding and problem-solving methods. This visual drawing process takes so much more time than traditional math. Furthermore, when they manually count up all those drawings, they have no real way of confirming if the problem is correct because they have no automatic recall to verify it against.

If schools just had students memorize the multiplication tables first, and then did a couple of days' worth of conceptual understanding, the students would have it down quickly. Instead, math students now get no real procedural, repetitive practice, so they don't really develop conceptual knowledge either. They are just low in math all around.

Different curriculum works for different kids. Homeschool parents understand this. Some kids do very well with conceptual, abstract math and they don't need repetition. Other kids need traditional math with algorithms and multiplication tables. I think math is where ed tech makes the most sense. Put the top kids in something like AoPS and put the struggling kids in a program in a more traditional program.

This is not true. All kids need to nail down math facts. Some do it more quickly and instinctively than others, but the way they learn is not different.

Ed Tech does not help at all here.

You are wrong. My youngest did not need help nailing down math facts beyond Beast Academy. She is the fastest kid in her class at school on math facts, and she's never done drills at home. The only math supplementing we've done is BA, and we do it at home, not at a center, and we are not math inclined ourselves - we just follow their script, and she knows all her math facts cold and can mentally add, subtract, multiply, and divide multi-digit numbers. We've never done flashcards, plaid math games (outside of BA), etc. This would not have worked for our other kids, but it's worked very well for her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really a school created problem.

When schools noticed that top students deeply understood math concepts, they changed the curriculum for everyone. They assumed that forcing all children to learn through abstract, big-picture thinking would automatically make them better at math. However, this ignored how math skills actually develop.

High-performing students often master the rules, formulas, and repetitive practice first, using that solid foundation to unlock deeper conceptual understanding later. By removing traditional math practice and drill-work from classrooms, schools left average and struggling students without the basic tools they need, ultimately making them worse at both the formulas and the concepts.

For example, students spend a massive amount of wasted time as teachers get them to draw out pictures and circles to understand multiplication, talk about it, and try to construct their own understanding and problem-solving methods. This visual drawing process takes so much more time than traditional math. Furthermore, when they manually count up all those drawings, they have no real way of confirming if the problem is correct because they have no automatic recall to verify it against.

If schools just had students memorize the multiplication tables first, and then did a couple of days' worth of conceptual understanding, the students would have it down quickly. Instead, math students now get no real procedural, repetitive practice, so they don't really develop conceptual knowledge either. They are just low in math all around.

Different curriculum works for different kids. Homeschool parents understand this. Some kids do very well with conceptual, abstract math and they don't need repetition. Other kids need traditional math with algorithms and multiplication tables. I think math is where ed tech makes the most sense. Put the top kids in something like AoPS and put the struggling kids in a program in a more traditional program.

This is not true. All kids need to nail down math facts. Some do it more quickly and instinctively than others, but the way they learn is not different.

Ed Tech does not help at all here.

It seems you're agreeing with PP - give the fast learners something that teaches the math facts quickly and briefly and review them in the context of challenging problems (which is what Beast Academy does) and give the normal kids something with regular facts practice well into upper elementary if necessary.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Why would you think the teachers
Would be putting together anything? These excellent programs are put together professionally and bought by the school department.

This is not true of every district. Mine doesn’t have content developers, so outside of the reading program, we are on our own.

There are still quality premade options e.g. https://teaching.betterlesson.com/browse/master_teachers/projects

Just curious, if you pay for something, does your school reimburse you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The common core curriculum is not great. We have been overseas frequently for work and the private schools with a British curriculum are almost always more rigorous than ones with an American curriculum that typically follows common core.

I disagree that the British system is more rigorous. They are different and the British system is not something most Americans would care for.

I’ve read a lot of posts here that their children are no longer reading complete books. I don’t understand that at all. The one change I think is positive is using online programs for subjects like history or geography. You can no longer trust the accuracy of textbooks coming from Texas. McGraw Hill has been accused of whitewashing history, omitting important parts of history, calling slaves “workers” to name a few. They have been made to change errors in their books.

Online, the Library of Congress, Lehrer Institute of History, History.com is a reputable site. High school should absolutely be using personal laptops. The internet has opened worlds of information that wasn’t available decades ago. Elementary school needs to learn the basics, no laptops necessary.

So you think whatever a teacher puts together in her free time to make money on Teachers Pay Teachers is better than a textbook? You know districts...don't have to buy textbooks that don't align with the politics of the majority, right?

And also - class novels aren't textbooks, and usually that's what people are referring to when they talk about not reading full books. My kids are in private with textbooks and trust me they aren't reading the geometry or science book cover to cover. But they are reading The Hobbit or Romeo and Juliet cover to cover.

Why would you think the teachers
Would be putting together anything? These excellent programs are put together professionally and bought by the school department.

The middle school has some amazing programs done on line where the 7th graders learn about every country in the world plus each individual country’s political system, their GDP, climate, agriculture, religions and the people. A book could never be as interactive.

As for textbooks they should never have political bias. I’m more concerned of inaccurate information. There’s plenty of evidence and forced retractions about changing facts in American history. Why not have middle school and high school students go directly to the source of American history which would be the American government and read the treaties, constitution, rules and regulations. Save a lot of paper.

And our schools pass out novels that they read. I only am familiar with middle school but my daughter ha read The Outsiders, Holes, The Giver, and Refugee that I remember.

I don’t think everyone is talking about textbooks when they say the elementary schools aren't having them read complete books. I know we never read textbooks from cover to cover.

Either people who believe everything should be done on the laptop or eliminate all laptops in grades 6-12 are being extreme and irrational.

What's the name of that middle school program?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:A NYTimes report describes how math and reading scores are down in large majorities of districts nationwide including the most affluent districts.

The article points to the end of NCLB and the rise of smartphones and social media. Where is the urgency to address this?

“There are a lot of people in affluent districts who think things are just fine, who have seen big losses over time,” said Professor Kane, the lead author of the report.

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/13/upshot/test-scores-school-districts-us.html?unlocked_article_code=1.iFA.Ig-Y.5zgcVCTi1CMl&smid=nytcore-android-share

Same period as mass immigration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not just smart phones and social media. A lot of these losses are happening among elementary age kids who don't have access to either. But the reliance on Ed Tech to teach math and reading is a big problem. Blaming screens at home doesn't make sense because kids have been watching screens at home for decades, that's not something that started in 2015.

What shifted for kids is they went from mostly using books, paper, and pencil in the classroom to using 1:1 devices and ed tech software. That's true for kids who were get zero screen time at home, and it's true for kids who get hours of screen time at home every day.

Go back to physical books, handwriting, and working out math problems with pencil and paper. Studies show that children retain information better and longer when they learn it from physical media instead of digitally.

Are the admins all getting mega kickbacks for signing on to all the ed-tech? Like are they all sleeping with their ed-tech sales reps or something?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Are the admins all getting mega kickbacks for signing on to all the ed-tech? Like are they all sleeping with their ed-tech sales reps or something?

People imagine that ed tech adoption is some nefarious, corrupt thing. Rather, there are a number of reasons admin are pressured to purchase and deploy computer-based learning platforms.

A number of states have learning standards that include computer-based work. In the same way that students need to know their multiplication facts by the end of 3rd grade, there will be similar standards for 21st century learning skills or something similar. Teachers who fail to teach these standards can have reduced evaluation scores.

Classrooms are also very diverse. I’ve taught in small, moderately selective private schools where two students in the room are scoring in single-digit percentiles on standardized tests and three students in the room are scoring in the 99th percentile. Computers make it easier to support lagging learner and to challenge fast learners without the teacher designing three separate lessons per day. We aren’t going to fix this issue until all schools have meaningful identification, support, and remediation for learning disabled students and have ability-tracked classes (currently too much of a risk for discrimination claims in the public school setting).

Finally, grading takes a lot of time. When teachers have student loads of up to 140 students, they don’t even have one minute per child per day to do grading. Automated learning activities provide fast, actionable feedback.

I am not saying that any of this makes ed tech great. Rather, it’s useful for parents to understand how we got here in education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Are the admins all getting mega kickbacks for signing on to all the ed-tech? Like are they all sleeping with their ed-tech sales reps or something?

People imagine that ed tech adoption is some nefarious, corrupt thing. Rather, there are a number of reasons admin are pressured to purchase and deploy computer-based learning platforms.

A number of states have learning standards that include computer-based work. In the same way that students need to know their multiplication facts by the end of 3rd grade, there will be similar standards for 21st century learning skills or something similar. Teachers who fail to teach these standards can have reduced evaluation scores.

Classrooms are also very diverse. I’ve taught in small, moderately selective private schools where two students in the room are scoring in single-digit percentiles on standardized tests and three students in the room are scoring in the 99th percentile. Computers make it easier to support lagging learner and to challenge fast learners without the teacher designing three separate lessons per day. We aren’t going to fix this issue until all schools have meaningful identification, support, and remediation for learning disabled students and have ability-tracked classes (currently too much of a risk for discrimination claims in the public school setting).

Finally, grading takes a lot of time. When teachers have student loads of up to 140 students, they don’t even have one minute per child per day to do grading. Automated learning activities provide fast, actionable feedback.

I am not saying that any of this makes ed tech great. Rather, it’s useful for parents to understand how we got here in education.

Edtech exploded during the pandemic. Schools realized they could get away with it and just stuck with it. It is disgusting that teachers are showing kids videos every 20 minutes in kindergarten

[Anonymous]

They have to pretend and inflate the numbers to justify spending the budget on bull crap. If teachers don't then they are blamed. Standardized test scores are lower and lower year after year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is really a school created problem.

When schools noticed that top students deeply understood math concepts, they changed the curriculum for everyone. They assumed that forcing all children to learn through abstract, big-picture thinking would automatically make them better at math. However, this ignored how math skills actually develop.

High-performing students often master the rules, formulas, and repetitive practice first, using that solid foundation to unlock deeper conceptual understanding later. By removing traditional math practice and drill-work from classrooms, schools left average and struggling students without the basic tools they need, ultimately making them worse at both the formulas and the concepts.

For example, students spend a massive amount of wasted time as teachers get them to draw out pictures and circles to understand multiplication, talk about it, and try to construct their own understanding and problem-solving methods. This visual drawing process takes so much more time than traditional math. Furthermore, when they manually count up all those drawings, they have no real way of confirming if the problem is correct because they have no automatic recall to verify it against.

If schools just had students memorize the multiplication tables first, and then did a couple of days' worth of conceptual understanding, the students would have it down quickly. Instead, math students now get no real procedural, repetitive practice, so they don't really develop conceptual knowledge either. They are just low in math all around.

Different curriculum works for different kids. Homeschool parents understand this. Some kids do very well with conceptual, abstract math and they don't need repetition. Other kids need traditional math with algorithms and multiplication tables. I think math is where ed tech makes the most sense. Put the top kids in something like AoPS and put the struggling kids in a program in a more traditional program.

This is not true. All kids need to nail down math facts. Some do it more quickly and instinctively than others, but the way they learn is not different.

Ed Tech does not help at all here.

It seems you're agreeing with PP - give the fast learners something that teaches the math facts quickly and briefly and review them in the context of challenging problems (which is what Beast Academy does) and give the normal kids something with regular facts practice well into upper elementary if necessary.

I do. I would prefer to send my kid to nature school with amazing teachers and no tech, but absent that option, I'd rather give the kids who are ahead something rigorous online like Beast Academy rather than make them sit and listen to the teacher teach to the lowest denominator how to add and subtract within 20 when they can already mentally add and subtract 4-digit numbers.