The decade-long "learning recession"

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest problem isn't students tuning into tech it's too many parents tuning out on their kid's education and expecting the schools to teach their kid everything, including manners. Too many parents are MIA. You deal with it all, teacher. I'm too busy doing me.

My kid's K teacher wouldn't even read actual books to the class. Instead she would show animated YouTube videos about books. The massive screen in every classroom is a problem. My kid's behavior dramatically improved after we took away her iPad at home. Teachers should experiment with doing the same in their classrooms to the extent possible. Daily screen time in kindergarten is not necessary.

It's the only way some of teachers believe they can offer differential learning. It's hard to teach reaching when you kindergartners who don't know their letters and kindergartners reading chapter books, so they have the advanced readers read to Amira on their ipads and focus on the struggling readers. I hate to say it's a good idea to create cohorts that young, but unless you default to technology for some kids, how else can you teach a class of 20+ kids who are at very different places entering kindergarten depending on parental involvement and quality of preschool?

I call BS. Schools have never tracked kids in kindergarten. By their nature kindergarteners are always going to have different reading abilities. We used to be able to have kindergarten without screens and we still can.

Why shouldn't advanced readers learn something in kindergarten? Just because we failed them in the past, doesn't mean who shouldn't do better. Why should they sit in a classroom and be bored because the teacher has to teach to the bottom? I favor testing at the beginning of the year and splitting classrooms by ability level, but everyone else around here seems to hate that idea. So if not that, then maybe teachers can use technology to at least teach them something.

The problem is you believe:
- Technology in the classroom is a net good; and
- Technology at home destroys children's brains

That is psychotic

I think technology in limited doses and on a closed system that is closely monitored is a net good. I don't mind if my kid does 45 minutes of math on the ipad a day if it's a high quality program and it's in between an outdoor recess and something like an art or music class and they don't have access to anything on their ipad other than the math program.

Tech in schools is not monitored, stop putting your head in the sand. Neither teachers nor students are monitored in how they use tech in schools. Kids are watching porn in schools on school-issued devices.

My head is not in the sand. I'm not defending tech in schools in the status quo. I believe the answer is to use tech better in schools, not eliminate it.

Well that's like saying teachers will provide math acceleration to one of three groups in a mixed class of 4th graders. It's not going to happen. It will always be abused because it is designed to be abused.

That's cynical. I'm sure we can design a closed system that only allows access to specific digital tools and blocks everything else. It just takes some work.

How long do you want kids to be exposed to pornography in schools while somebody figures this out and how long will that last before kids find workarounds?

Maybe you should join the Amish?

Obviously, no one wants their kids exposed to pornography. No one on here is defending the status quo. Everyone agrees that things need to change.

Most of us believe that there is a place for some technology in schools. There is some very high quality ed tech (I'm not talking about things horrible products like Prodigy), and it's especially good for differential learning. Programs that do frequent assessments and give tailored work based on student results are quite good if administered properly and safely.

What do you mean "most of us"? I have met zero parents in our elementary school who want anywhere near the level of technology use there is now. Most would be happier with zero tech use in early elementary school.

It is simply not okay for kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content on school issued devices. It sounds like you are labeling that perspective as "Amish" (whatever tf that means). That is psychotic.

Literally no one wants their kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content. Kids should not have access to the web or distracting games on devices. Kids shouldn't be on devices all day, either. It doesn't mean you discount all technology, especially now that quality ed tech is AI powered and is very good at identifying weaknesses and teaching to them.

[Anonymous]

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.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest problem isn't students tuning into tech it's too many parents tuning out on their kid's education and expecting the schools to teach their kid everything, including manners. Too many parents are MIA. You deal with it all, teacher. I'm too busy doing me.

My kid's K teacher wouldn't even read actual books to the class. Instead she would show animated YouTube videos about books. The massive screen in every classroom is a problem. My kid's behavior dramatically improved after we took away her iPad at home. Teachers should experiment with doing the same in their classrooms to the extent possible. Daily screen time in kindergarten is not necessary.

It's the only way some of teachers believe they can offer differential learning. It's hard to teach reaching when you kindergartners who don't know their letters and kindergartners reading chapter books, so they have the advanced readers read to Amira on their ipads and focus on the struggling readers. I hate to say it's a good idea to create cohorts that young, but unless you default to technology for some kids, how else can you teach a class of 20+ kids who are at very different places entering kindergarten depending on parental involvement and quality of preschool?

I call BS. Schools have never tracked kids in kindergarten. By their nature kindergarteners are always going to have different reading abilities. We used to be able to have kindergarten without screens and we still can.

Why shouldn't advanced readers learn something in kindergarten? Just because we failed them in the past, doesn't mean who shouldn't do better. Why should they sit in a classroom and be bored because the teacher has to teach to the bottom? I favor testing at the beginning of the year and splitting classrooms by ability level, but everyone else around here seems to hate that idea. So if not that, then maybe teachers can use technology to at least teach them something.

The problem is you believe:
- Technology in the classroom is a net good; and
- Technology at home destroys children's brains

That is psychotic

I think technology in limited doses and on a closed system that is closely monitored is a net good. I don't mind if my kid does 45 minutes of math on the ipad a day if it's a high quality program and it's in between an outdoor recess and something like an art or music class and they don't have access to anything on their ipad other than the math program.

Tech in schools is not monitored, stop putting your head in the sand. Neither teachers nor students are monitored in how they use tech in schools. Kids are watching porn in schools on school-issued devices.

My head is not in the sand. I'm not defending tech in schools in the status quo. I believe the answer is to use tech better in schools, not eliminate it.

Well that's like saying teachers will provide math acceleration to one of three groups in a mixed class of 4th graders. It's not going to happen. It will always be abused because it is designed to be abused.

That's cynical. I'm sure we can design a closed system that only allows access to specific digital tools and blocks everything else. It just takes some work.

How long do you want kids to be exposed to pornography in schools while somebody figures this out and how long will that last before kids find workarounds?

Maybe you should join the Amish?

Obviously, no one wants their kids exposed to pornography. No one on here is defending the status quo. Everyone agrees that things need to change.

Most of us believe that there is a place for some technology in schools. There is some very high quality ed tech (I'm not talking about things horrible products like Prodigy), and it's especially good for differential learning. Programs that do frequent assessments and give tailored work based on student results are quite good if administered properly and safely.

What do you mean "most of us"? I have met zero parents in our elementary school who want anywhere near the level of technology use there is now. Most would be happier with zero tech use in early elementary school.

It is simply not okay for kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content on school issued devices. It sounds like you are labeling that perspective as "Amish" (whatever tf that means). That is psychotic.

Literally no one wants their kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content. Kids should not have access to the web or distracting games on devices. Kids shouldn't be on devices all day, either. It doesn't mean you discount all technology, especially now that quality ed tech is AI powered and is very good at identifying weaknesses and teaching to them.

I've read about AI schools, they sound horrible. I won't support taxes to fund AI school.

[Anonymous]

Educational outcomes have gotten markedly worse since schools started introducing edtech. Yes, it would absolutely be better for kids not to have edtech. In the face of the data I don't know why anyone would support continuing to spend tax dollars on edtech unless they had a financial interest in edtech and are just that sociopathic that they don't care about the impact on kids.

Btw, at present, edtech is not monitored and kids are not protected from dangerous content. Therefore, edtech should not be in schools. If you are supporting the continued use of edtech in schools, you are supporting giving kids distracting and dangerous devices, and are a sociopath.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest problem isn't students tuning into tech it's too many parents tuning out on their kid's education and expecting the schools to teach their kid everything, including manners. Too many parents are MIA. You deal with it all, teacher. I'm too busy doing me.

My kid's K teacher wouldn't even read actual books to the class. Instead she would show animated YouTube videos about books. The massive screen in every classroom is a problem. My kid's behavior dramatically improved after we took away her iPad at home. Teachers should experiment with doing the same in their classrooms to the extent possible. Daily screen time in kindergarten is not necessary.

It's the only way some of teachers believe they can offer differential learning. It's hard to teach reaching when you kindergartners who don't know their letters and kindergartners reading chapter books, so they have the advanced readers read to Amira on their ipads and focus on the struggling readers. I hate to say it's a good idea to create cohorts that young, but unless you default to technology for some kids, how else can you teach a class of 20+ kids who are at very different places entering kindergarten depending on parental involvement and quality of preschool?

I call BS. Schools have never tracked kids in kindergarten. By their nature kindergarteners are always going to have different reading abilities. We used to be able to have kindergarten without screens and we still can.

Why shouldn't advanced readers learn something in kindergarten? Just because we failed them in the past, doesn't mean who shouldn't do better. Why should they sit in a classroom and be bored because the teacher has to teach to the bottom? I favor testing at the beginning of the year and splitting classrooms by ability level, but everyone else around here seems to hate that idea. So if not that, then maybe teachers can use technology to at least teach them something.

The problem is you believe:
- Technology in the classroom is a net good; and
- Technology at home destroys children's brains

That is psychotic

I think technology in limited doses and on a closed system that is closely monitored is a net good. I don't mind if my kid does 45 minutes of math on the ipad a day if it's a high quality program and it's in between an outdoor recess and something like an art or music class and they don't have access to anything on their ipad other than the math program.

Tech in schools is not monitored, stop putting your head in the sand. Neither teachers nor students are monitored in how they use tech in schools. Kids are watching porn in schools on school-issued devices.

My head is not in the sand. I'm not defending tech in schools in the status quo. I believe the answer is to use tech better in schools, not eliminate it.

Well that's like saying teachers will provide math acceleration to one of three groups in a mixed class of 4th graders. It's not going to happen. It will always be abused because it is designed to be abused.

That's cynical. I'm sure we can design a closed system that only allows access to specific digital tools and blocks everything else. It just takes some work.

How long do you want kids to be exposed to pornography in schools while somebody figures this out and how long will that last before kids find workarounds?

Maybe you should join the Amish?

Obviously, no one wants their kids exposed to pornography. No one on here is defending the status quo. Everyone agrees that things need to change.

Most of us believe that there is a place for some technology in schools. There is some very high quality ed tech (I'm not talking about things horrible products like Prodigy), and it's especially good for differential learning. Programs that do frequent assessments and give tailored work based on student results are quite good if administered properly and safely.

What do you mean "most of us"? I have met zero parents in our elementary school who want anywhere near the level of technology use there is now. Most would be happier with zero tech use in early elementary school.

It is simply not okay for kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content on school issued devices. It sounds like you are labeling that perspective as "Amish" (whatever tf that means). That is psychotic.

Literally no one wants their kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content. Kids should not have access to the web or distracting games on devices. Kids shouldn't be on devices all day, either. It doesn't mean you discount all technology, especially now that quality ed tech is AI powered and is very good at identifying weaknesses and teaching to them.

I've read about AI schools, they sound horrible. I won't support taxes to fund AI school.

Public schools already used AI powered learning despite your lack of support and they have been for a long time. What I think is funny is that schools when super expensive schools like Alpha School do their marketing, they fail to mention that much of their AI learning is on IXL, which is also in most public schools.

[Anonymous]

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.

it doesn't make sense at all. Math and literacy outcomes have gotten worse since the introduction of edtech. It is not helping our kids. It's probably helping your pocketbook though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Educational outcomes have gotten markedly worse since schools started introducing edtech. Yes, it would absolutely be better for kids not to have edtech. In the face of the data I don't know why anyone would support continuing to spend tax dollars on edtech unless they had a financial interest in edtech and are just that sociopathic that they don't care about the impact on kids.

Btw, at present, edtech is not monitored and kids are not protected from dangerous content. Therefore, edtech should not be in schools. If you are supporting the continued use of edtech in schools, you are supporting giving kids distracting and dangerous devices, and are a sociopath.

I think we should start by teaching kids basic logic so they don't grow up to make arguments like the above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The biggest problem isn't students tuning into tech it's too many parents tuning out on their kid's education and expecting the schools to teach their kid everything, including manners. Too many parents are MIA. You deal with it all, teacher. I'm too busy doing me.

My kid's K teacher wouldn't even read actual books to the class. Instead she would show animated YouTube videos about books. The massive screen in every classroom is a problem. My kid's behavior dramatically improved after we took away her iPad at home. Teachers should experiment with doing the same in their classrooms to the extent possible. Daily screen time in kindergarten is not necessary.

It's the only way some of teachers believe they can offer differential learning. It's hard to teach reaching when you kindergartners who don't know their letters and kindergartners reading chapter books, so they have the advanced readers read to Amira on their ipads and focus on the struggling readers. I hate to say it's a good idea to create cohorts that young, but unless you default to technology for some kids, how else can you teach a class of 20+ kids who are at very different places entering kindergarten depending on parental involvement and quality of preschool?

I call BS. Schools have never tracked kids in kindergarten. By their nature kindergarteners are always going to have different reading abilities. We used to be able to have kindergarten without screens and we still can.

Why shouldn't advanced readers learn something in kindergarten? Just because we failed them in the past, doesn't mean who shouldn't do better. Why should they sit in a classroom and be bored because the teacher has to teach to the bottom? I favor testing at the beginning of the year and splitting classrooms by ability level, but everyone else around here seems to hate that idea. So if not that, then maybe teachers can use technology to at least teach them something.

The problem is you believe:
- Technology in the classroom is a net good; and
- Technology at home destroys children's brains

That is psychotic

I think technology in limited doses and on a closed system that is closely monitored is a net good. I don't mind if my kid does 45 minutes of math on the ipad a day if it's a high quality program and it's in between an outdoor recess and something like an art or music class and they don't have access to anything on their ipad other than the math program.

Tech in schools is not monitored, stop putting your head in the sand. Neither teachers nor students are monitored in how they use tech in schools. Kids are watching porn in schools on school-issued devices.

My head is not in the sand. I'm not defending tech in schools in the status quo. I believe the answer is to use tech better in schools, not eliminate it.

Well that's like saying teachers will provide math acceleration to one of three groups in a mixed class of 4th graders. It's not going to happen. It will always be abused because it is designed to be abused.

That's cynical. I'm sure we can design a closed system that only allows access to specific digital tools and blocks everything else. It just takes some work.

How long do you want kids to be exposed to pornography in schools while somebody figures this out and how long will that last before kids find workarounds?

Maybe you should join the Amish?

Obviously, no one wants their kids exposed to pornography. No one on here is defending the status quo. Everyone agrees that things need to change.

Most of us believe that there is a place for some technology in schools. There is some very high quality ed tech (I'm not talking about things horrible products like Prodigy), and it's especially good for differential learning. Programs that do frequent assessments and give tailored work based on student results are quite good if administered properly and safely.

What do you mean "most of us"? I have met zero parents in our elementary school who want anywhere near the level of technology use there is now. Most would be happier with zero tech use in early elementary school.

It is simply not okay for kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content on school issued devices. It sounds like you are labeling that perspective as "Amish" (whatever tf that means). That is psychotic.

Literally no one wants their kids to have access to distracting and potentially dangerous content. Kids should not have access to the web or distracting games on devices. Kids shouldn't be on devices all day, either. It doesn't mean you discount all technology, especially now that quality ed tech is AI powered and is very good at identifying weaknesses and teaching to them.

I've read about AI schools, they sound horrible. I won't support taxes to fund AI school.

Public schools already used AI powered learning despite your lack of support and they have been for a long time. What I think is funny is that schools when super expensive schools like Alpha School do their marketing, they fail to mention that much of their AI learning is on IXL, which is also in most public schools.

Outcomes are getting worse,.not better with AI powered "learning"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educational outcomes have gotten markedly worse since schools started introducing edtech. Yes, it would absolutely be better for kids not to have edtech. In the face of the data I don't know why anyone would support continuing to spend tax dollars on edtech unless they had a financial interest in edtech and are just that sociopathic that they don't care about the impact on kids.

Btw, at present, edtech is not monitored and kids are not protected from dangerous content. Therefore, edtech should not be in schools. If you are supporting the continued use of edtech in schools, you are supporting giving kids distracting and dangerous devices, and are a sociopath.

I think we should start by teaching kids basic logic so they don't grow up to make arguments like the above.

You want kids to grow up to support spending tax dollars to enrich edtech companies whose products don't help kids learn because logic?

[Anonymous]

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.

It is this! I have had a front row seat to watching and requiring paper work products.

Please go back to paper and pencils and books! I'm not a luddite but I absolutely believe you learn better when you write something down. Typing it isn't the same.

I was discussing this problem with my parents and they were shocked I didn't want my 1st grader to have a laptop. They asked why I'd not want him to know how to use technology. But at the same time, my parents are upset at my son's handwriting and also want him to have a better attention span- these are directly correlated! My 1st grader spends 5 hours a day on his laptop at school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educational outcomes have gotten markedly worse since schools started introducing edtech. Yes, it would absolutely be better for kids not to have edtech. In the face of the data I don't know why anyone would support continuing to spend tax dollars on edtech unless they had a financial interest in edtech and are just that sociopathic that they don't care about the impact on kids.

Btw, at present, edtech is not monitored and kids are not protected from dangerous content. Therefore, edtech should not be in schools. If you are supporting the continued use of edtech in schools, you are supporting giving kids distracting and dangerous devices, and are a sociopath.

I think we should start by teaching kids basic logic so they don't grow up to make arguments like the above.

You want kids to grow up to support spending tax dollars to enrich edtech companies whose products don't help kids learn because logic?

NP I want edtech out of schools, but I also agree that the pp had a terrible argument.

[Anonymous]

I'm convinced this whole thing came about because our fancy EdD school administrators aren't as smart as the people selling EdTech. They're just taken for a ride. They just are wowed by technology and aren't smart enough to see past all the glitter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educational outcomes have gotten markedly worse since schools started introducing edtech. Yes, it would absolutely be better for kids not to have edtech. In the face of the data I don't know why anyone would support continuing to spend tax dollars on edtech unless they had a financial interest in edtech and are just that sociopathic that they don't care about the impact on kids.

Btw, at present, edtech is not monitored and kids are not protected from dangerous content. Therefore, edtech should not be in schools. If you are supporting the continued use of edtech in schools, you are supporting giving kids distracting and dangerous devices, and are a sociopath.

I think we should start by teaching kids basic logic so they don't grow up to make arguments like the above.

You want kids to grow up to support spending tax dollars to enrich edtech companies whose products don't help kids learn because logic?

NP I want edtech out of schools, but I also agree that the pp had a terrible argument.

I support keeping edtech out of schools if we also test starting in kindergarten and create classrooms and cohorts based on test scores, so that more advanced kids don't have to spend instructional time learning things they already know. This is the ideal solution.

Absent that, high-quality edtech in a safe and controlled environment is better than making kids who can already read chapter books learn phonics, or making gifted kids do basic math when they are capable of high-level, competition-style math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Educational outcomes have gotten markedly worse since schools started introducing edtech. Yes, it would absolutely be better for kids not to have edtech. In the face of the data I don't know why anyone would support continuing to spend tax dollars on edtech unless they had a financial interest in edtech and are just that sociopathic that they don't care about the impact on kids.

Btw, at present, edtech is not monitored and kids are not protected from dangerous content. Therefore, edtech should not be in schools. If you are supporting the continued use of edtech in schools, you are supporting giving kids distracting and dangerous devices, and are a sociopath.

I think we should start by teaching kids basic logic so they don't grow up to make arguments like the above.

You want kids to grow up to support spending tax dollars to enrich edtech companies whose products don't help kids learn because logic?

NP I want edtech out of schools, but I also agree that the pp had a terrible argument.

I support keeping edtech out of schools if we also test starting in kindergarten and create classrooms and cohorts based on test scores, so that more advanced kids don't have to spend instructional time learning things they already know. This is the ideal solution.

Absent that, high-quality edtech in a safe and controlled environment is better than making kids who can already read chapter books learn phonics, or making gifted kids do basic math when they are capable of high-level, competition-style math.

This doesn't exist..you are acting like it exists but it does not